MI

I
I

I
i

140
728

 

.THS_

 

.l

I

‘\
J

{HR/Er ‘1

“U

 

 

PLACE IN REIURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/05 a/CIRC/DatoDmJndd-pdfi

 

‘2

ENERGY AND FUTURE URBAN FORM

‘30.! Mg

by
William C. Weber

Presented in partial completion
of the requirements for the
Master's Degree in Urban Planning,
Michigan State University,
February, 1976.

"Plan B" Advisor: Prof. Myles Boylan

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

I. INTRODUCTIONOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
II. AMERICA'S ENERGY SITUATION

A. Energy Consumption in the United States.............

B. EnergyAvailableOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.00.0.0000...

CO some ImplicationSOOO.OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00.0....
III. EFFECTS OF EXISTING URBAN FORM ON ENERGY CONSUMPTION.....
IV. FUTURE URBAN FORM

A. Goals and ObjectiveSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

B. General Form and Structure..........................

C. The Important Role of Transportation................

D. The Central Business District

and the Residential Neighborhood,...................

V. IWLMNTATION OF CHANGE0.000000000000000IOOOOOOOIOOOO...
VI. CONCLUSIONOOOO.OOOOOOOOOOOOOO.00.0.0.0...000.00.000.00...
FOOTNOTES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

l

h

l3
18

2h
28
MI

56
62
69

I. INTRODUCTION

 

This paper deals with a topic of prime importance to the fudge
of life in American cities as well as to the continued welfare of our
society, and that is the effects which a greatly changed future supply
of natural energy may have on our cities in terms of land use, size
and shape, transportation, and urban design. Because of rising fuel
prices and an increasingly competitive world energy market marked by
political turmoil between the energy-producing and energy consuming
countries, very few informed persons would doubt that the next thirty
or forty years will witness profound changes in the way in which we
view energy supplies, in the way in which we consume energy, in the
prices we pay for such energy, and in the way we regard our position
in the world energy marketplace. Indeed, this process of maturing
will undoubtedly affect the way in which we organize our settlements.

I expect that the remainder of the century will be a very difficult
and challenging experience for the continued development of our urban
areas since so much of our past urban growth has been premised on a
cornucopia of cheap natural energy.

Abundant cheap fuel influenced the location of activities and
land uses, allowed for the rapid growth of an auto-based transportation
system, and permitted the design of buildings which use great amounts
of energy for heating and cooling. To reverse such habits so that less
energy is consumed while continuing to strive to build a system of
urban living which lends happiness, health, and prosperity to all will
be a very great challenge to urban planners.

Planners must now begin to make energy use a factor in all of their
considerations. This extra , added dimension may in some instances prove
to be difficult but may also serve as an additional argument to be
employed in support of certain "schools" of urban design which advocate
increased population densities, reduced auto dependence, a renewed role
for the neighborhood and the central city, and ecologicallyebased
planning. Regardless of philosophy, energy has now become (if it was
not already) a matter of crucial interest to enlightened urban and

regional planners.

-2-

As a student of urban planning who has long been concerned with
environmental affairs and has become increasingly aware of the necessity
of Man to live within the ecological limits that his finite spaceship
imposes upon him, the topic of energy and future urban form came to be
a natural marriage of interests. I am very much in favor of influencing
some basic changes in urban living, in hatching a new energy and environ-
mental ethic, and in fostering the growth of emerging life styles which
promise to be less energy-intensive without sacrificing those key
elements which I regard as most essential and germane to a satisfying
and fruitful human existence. Obviously, all the implications which an
altered energy diet carries could fill a number of volumes of sociology,
planning, architecture, geography, and psychology but I intend to deal
here with Just a few aspects of how American metropolitan areas ought
(or will) begin to change from the point of view of an urban planner.

What are some of the issues I will deal with here? In the initial
section I will examine the world energy market together with predicted
future U.S. energy consumption and future energy availability. Along
with the impact of hoped-for energy technology advancements, this shall
give a picture of the coming energy state of this country and lend
valuable perspective to what I will later advocate. Additionally, the
extended analysis of future energy supplies and consumption will serve
to dispel many of the false impressions of our energy situation which
are presented in the media by the large energy corporations.

Next, I will comment on the issue of urban land use and how it
influences and is influenced by energy prices. This will lead into a
discussion of what basic, large scale changes should be made in land use,
and how land use planning should be very closely united with transporta-
tion planning. Future urban transportation schemes will be outlined and
some examples of how these concepts may support future urban design
will be put forth. New (and not so new) ideas regarding the design of
the Central Business District and the residential neighborhood will be
discussed and some broad suggestions regarding the implementation of all
these proposals will be included. 1

The time frame.in which I am working is about thirty or forty years.

That should be long enough, I estimate, to get us past what should be

-3-

the leanest energy years and be time enough to affect (at least partially)
most of the changes I advocate. A longer view could not very accurately
guage the impact of technological advancements, foretell such improvements
which are yet beyond the horizon and still unforeseen, nor Judge coming
social, psychological, and political evolutions which will also play an
important role in urban development.

The great majority of writers who have made prognostications about
the future have been in error, it seems, since unforeseen events occur
which upset their basic premises. I do not suspect that my efforts will
be met with too much more success than most, although I will attempt in
my writing to control my radical impulses and present a point of view
which is conservative enough to be acceptable and within the realm of
possibility. A friend recently wondered aloud to me whether writing about
cities of the future was akin to writing science fiction. After a
chuckle, I assured her that I was trying to keep my work out of that
categroy by making what seem to me to be modest assumptions based on
realistic extensions of present conditions and a sober assessment of human
nature. Only time will tell if my Judgements were correct. I hope that

the reader will draw similar conclusions upon an examination of the facts.

-h-

II. AMERICA'S ENERGY SITUATION

A. Energy Consumption ig_the United States

 

Perhaps the most outstanding single characteristic of the United
States in the second half of the Twentieth Century is its prolifigate
use of natural energy. In this country (and others) people's lives are
defined and influenced to an astonishing degree by the use of natural
energy for transportation, work, shelter, and recreation as they have never
been in the past, most even in the recent past. We live in a high-energy
civilization filled with every conceivable power gadget and are becoming
more energy conscious daily. Increasing per capita energy consumption
coupled with a steadily growing population has brought us to a situation
of crisis proportions as the easily obtained domestic and world sources
of energy shrink and more nations compete for world energy resources.
The present nature of the U.S. economy dictates that more energy be made
available annually at the rock bottom prices we have enjoyed for years.
Life in our cities, in particular , demands a great deal of energy, as
current transportation patterns and habits are very energy-intensive.
How tightly are we gripped by such energy demands? Let me outline our
present and predicted energy-use levels.

Between 1950 and 1965 the total U.S. energy requirements increased
about fifty per cent. This 1965 level will have grown by seventy per
cent by 1980 and by 250 per cent by the year 2000.1' The U.S. energy
consumption in 1973 was equal to thirteen billion barrels of oil and
current projections indicate that by 1985 our requirements will equal
twenty billion barrels. The U.S. will require over 300 billion barrels
of oil between now and the turn of the century, which is more than we
can likely find within our borders and about half of all possible
Mideastern discoveries for the next 100 years. °

Demand for electrical energy has been increasing at a rate
surpassing that of the total energy demand, principally because of
air conditioning and space heating requirements.3' The total consumption

of electrical energy in the U.S. quadrupled between 1950 and 1980, while

population will have increased by "only" one-third. Per capita

consumption of electricity in that period rose from 2,000 to 6,500
kilowatt hours per year. The 1980 per capita consumption of electrical
energy is estimated at 11,500 kw. hours per year. 'Thus, demand for
elctrical energy is doubling every decade.

Oil and natural gas form 75% of the nation's current supply of
natural energy. The supply of these two mineral in the Western
hemisphere for the next fifty years is about double nature's supply,
assuming the five per cent annual rate of growth estimated by the
Federal Energy Administration. If oil consumption continues its
recent rise, no fewer than 325 billion barrels will be needed in this
country in the next thirty years. More astonishingly, if growth in
demand continues unchecked, we may require 600 billion barrels more
in the thirty years that followEi By 1985 the total annual U.S. petro-
leum demand thus might be equal to using up the energy equivalent
of the total potential oil reserves in Alaska every two years. The
cumulative petroleum use of the U.S. by the year 2000 might be more than
ten times these Alaskan reserves. Such growth in oil consumption could
completely drain the conventional oil supply in the U.S. in the next
fifty years. However, production of oil could "peak on " long before
the resource base is exhausted. Conventional oil production ought to
level off in a decade or two and certainly before the end of the
century. '

Most recent energy use predictions have been too high because
they are only extrapolations of past trends and do not take into accOunt
such factors as higher energy prices, lower fertility rates, government
influence, lowered material growth and consumption, less wasteful uses
of energy supplies, and the growth of a post-industrial society. But
at least these predictions make us realize what could easily be the
case; we are made to realize what level of energy supplies are necessary
if future consumption continues past trends and patterns. The future
is in our hands.

The Federal Energy Administration (FEA), making the conservative
price estimate of a barrel of crude oil in 1985 to be $7 to $11 per

barrel in 1985, stated that domestic oil production can be increased

-6-

fifty per cent by that date, to as much as 17 billion barrels per day.
Today oil imports average six million barrels per day and are not expected
to drop until 1977 , according to the FEA. By 1985 oil prices will likely
be great enough to cut oil and gas imports down to the equivalent of five
million barrels per day even though the overall evergy demand will have
grown fifty per cent to 105 quadrillion British Thermal Units (Btu's) or

higher.7'

U.S. energy requirements are met by an array of matural sources: coal,
domestic oil, domestic gas, nuclear power, imported oil and gas, hydro-
electrical power, and to a very slight extent, other sources such as the
sun, biofuels, and wind. A graphic breakdown of energy resources consumed
(excluding hydroelectrice) for 1972 and 1985 is presented below with vary-

ing allocations of each resource in 1985 as influenced by Federal policy:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1985
If Govt. takes Govt. restrains Govt. stimulates
110 1972 no action, demand demand
100 t‘WMT
ANS "name *ywfif 6‘
90 (154‘) ’ HEK ”um"; MHUx NU!
. O 112R “Wm Dilution: MW
80 00‘ came '” payy
70 ‘ ”LEM . r' ' mama 00"" Dom. (1A6
60 W (W? (2A6 we
5 0 7'32». 00") . 00 fl.
mtg; . . (2A5 00 VI .
40 93,. um 00'1- 00M. 00M 0 L
30 ‘ OW- Dow On. |
(9N3: Dom or t, 0‘ L
Quad- 20 00M- 0" ‘
rillion 10 0' “ C tom, . L ,.
Oil:
$7/bbl. $11 $7 $11 $7 $11

The total amount of energy available for consumption may be broken
down by various general sectors of the economy. In 1968 the U.S. energy

budget in quadrillion Btu's looked like this:

 

 

Sector Net Energy Input_ Gross Energy Input
Household and Commercial 13.6 16.1
Industry 19.0 21.h
Transportation 15.2 15.2
Electricity generation, lh.0 ——--
utilities
Total 62.h 52.9

Industry is the single greatest user of the nation's energy,
requiring h2% of the annual total. this is followed by transportation
with 29% of the demand and by the household and commercial sector with
19%. Fuel for autos, trucks, buses, and Jet airplanes accounts for
81% of the propulsion energy. when energy consumption for secondary
transport related activities such as fuel refining and manufacture
of transportation equipment is included, the Net Energy Input for
transportation rises to 38% of the total. Petroleum provides 95% of
this demand,.e1ectricity about 0.1%. Of energy consumed in the home,
space heating is far and away the greates source of use, requiring 57%
of the total. Other domestic energy users are water heating (15%),
refrigeration (6%), air'conditioning (13%), and other uses, including
lighting (11%).‘8'

More than half of all U.S. transportation energy is consumed by
cars. this is lh% of the total U.S. energy consumption and more than
30% of our total petroleum supplies. Automobile gasoline consumption
has risen drastically since World War II for two major reasons: first,
there are twice as many cars on the road today as there were in 1950;
secondly, the average American drives twice as far now as in 19h6, mainly
because the shift of the population to the suburbs necessitates longer
commuting distances to work, recreation and shopping.9'

Gasoline consumption, now about 100 billion gallons per Year , was
reduced by about only 35 million gallons per year in the last three years
despite a 180% price increase. these prices are now more reflective
(although still not equal to) what the rest of the world has been living
with for years. We have enjoyed abundant cheap energy for years as our
rapidly expanding industrial base dominated the world resource market.

Now we must readjust to the realities of a finite planet.

-8-

B. ENERGY AVAILABLE

Contrary to popular belief, the world is not running our of
natural energy resources. The difficulty is that with existing sources
there is a limit on how quickly we can extract what is in the ground
and deliver it to the consumer in usable form. Moreover, the amount
of resources or reserves does not actually indicate how much oil, gas,
or coal is available for consumption. Refinery capacity determines how
much can be made available for sale. The desire of the oil, gas, or
coal companies to mine and sell the resource varies with the price
and the cost of extraction. Government taxation and leasing policy
and foreign countries' development policies also play important roles

in determining how much of a resource a company will or can go after.lo°

Oil and natural gas account for 75% of the total U.S. energy supply.11

Only about 15% of these minerals which are consumed in this country are

imported.1 The National Academy of Sciences predicts that undiscov-
ered recoverable resources of oil andnatural gas, onshore and offshore,
in the U.S. and abroad are considerably smaller than indicated by
figures currently accepted within governmental circles.l3° That is,
world petroleum supplies may run out in 50 years, U.S., Arabs, and

all.

The worldwide discovered petroleum resources may reach their peak
rate of production in the 1980's even if all the constraints give way.
Surely additional oil will be found but the resource base itself suggests
that oil production could well reach its peak before the turn of the
century. The world oil picture is thus quite likely to follow the
U.S. pattern except that production may grow at least into the 1980's
and perhaps a decade longer before it, too, reaches a peak and begins
to decline.1 °

The MS billion barrels of proven oil reserves represent only about
30% of the oil in the known reserves because current technology and
prices permit recovery of only 30% of the oil in a given field. Oil
supply, thus, must take into account technology and price. Depending
on these factors, various authorities have estimated the total amount
of oil recoverable in the U.S. anywhere from 200 to 2,000 billion barrels.

about 200 billion barrels is probably representative of the readily

recoverable U.S. crude oil reserves. This is about 1,090 quadrillion
Btu's. The petroleum reserves of the world are estimated to be
about 10,000 quadrillion Btu's.lS'

Natural gas is truely our most limited energy source. Discovered
reserves will not last mosre than another decade. We may have already
reached the peak of feasible gas production; if not, we will have by
1990.16°

Coal contains roughly thirty times the energy value of our combined
gas and oil inventories. So adequate are the U.S. coal reserves that
we are in no danger of running out for another century. However,
coal creates numerous environmental problems in its mining and burning.17°

Electrical power generated by turbines propelled by the force of
water, once a prominent source of this nation's energy , now supplies
only h% of the total U.S. energy supply.18° Since the majority of
the nation's largest rivers are already fitted with a full complement
of dams and environmentalists and riparian owners are quick to oppose
any new dams, it is highly unlikely that hydroelectric power will increase
in the future as a power source for the U.S.

Nuclear power , which now generates only 5.h% of the U.S. energy
needs, could provide 10% of our total energy requirements by 1985 and
25 to hO % by 2000.19' By 1985 the uranium demand to fuel the nuclear
fission reactors will have increased four-fold. Can the uranium
industry expand fast enough to meet the demands of the '80's? With
the predicted rate of nuclear fission power profileration, known
reserves will last no longer than another 25 years.

Aside from the uranium supply problem, nuclear fission has yet
to convince a number of observers that the collosal dangers of radiation
escape which it presents (and will continue to present for 250,000
years) do not negate its benefits as a power source. In addition to
the gigantic dangers posed by fission reactors, a number of scientists
point out the fact that the reactors are themselves an "energy sink".
That is, the first seven years of'a reactor's development constitute
a direct energy loss and with its relatively short 25 year life sapn,

a reactor becomes much less the energy bargain it may appear to be.

-10-

The only way nuclear power can make a significant contribution
to our power meeds in the 1990's and beyond is if the breeder reactor
is successfullly developed. At least 15 years away, the breeder reactor,
would create more irridated uranium than it uses and , thus, be able
to supply fuel for all nuclear plants, lowering the cost of electricity
produced. If the breeder were to be abandoned or to fail nuclear energy
could prove to be a short-lived energy source -- a nuclear flash in the
dark, so to speak.

Man's ultimate energy source may be a solar reaction reproduced
here on earth in a nuclear fusion reactor. Nuclear fusion, which could
be safer than fission, and employ virtually inexhaustible fuels,
represents the most difficult technical challenge of the century.
Presently, fusion only is in the experimental stage and is not considered
a viable future alternative yet. A demonstration fusion reactor is at
least 20 to hO years off. If (a big "if") technologically possible,
fusion reactors producing electricity could become price competitive
in the 2lst Century.

The development of the fusion reactor as a significant energy
source should not be relied upon too heavily, however, due to the
formidable technological barriers which must be surmounted for its
development. Why not let the sum handle the fusion reaction and simply
collect its radiated heat and light rays? Here is an inexhaustible
source of energy which is produced free of cost. Our expenditures
would cover the apparatus necessary for transforming the solar radiation
into useable heat and electricity. This may be done in a number of
ways. One method which is currently technologically feasible and
quickly becoming price-competitive is known as solar collection. Water
or some other liquid is circulated between two flat pieces of metal and
heated by the sun to 130 degrees F. or more. The hot water is then stored
for use in a space heater or may be tapped to drive and air conditioner.
Electricity may be produced by use of the sun in two ways. One involves
the use of parabolic mirrors to produce very hot steam that in turn
drives a turbine generator. The other employs photovoltaic cells to
convert sunlight directly into electircity.

Presently, both systems are relatively inefficient and extremely

-11-

costly when compared to conventional means of generating electric power.
But many experts believe that the effective use of solar heating, combined
with energy conservation, can reduce a household's needs for electricity

to such low levels that solar generation of electric power may be unnecess-
ary for decades. Studies have shown that solar systems can satisfy

100% and 98% of Los Angeles' heating and cobling energy needs and h5%

and 92% of Minneapolis' heating and cooling needs.2 A backup system
(furnace) is needed for power during periods of protracted cloudiness
but the fuel savings produced by the use of solar collectors should more
than make up for this deficiency once solar collectors can be mass
produced cheaply. Although the initial cost of a solar heating and
cooling system is high, the initial investment is offset by the savings
in costs of conventional fuels over the entire life-cycle of the build-
ing. A comprehensivq6conomic analysis with electrically heated homes
even before the recent escalation in fuel prices shows thatithe fuel savings
from solar energy more than pay for the extra investment in every section
of the U.S. except the Pacific Northwest.21' The TRW corporation foresees
a $1 billion per year U.S. market for solar heating and cooling units
by 2000, resulting in a savings of more than a quarter billion barrels
of oil annually. Enthusiasts of photovoltaic power believe that efforts
to improve efficiences and develop a continuous silicon ribbon for
mass production could reduce the present cost a thousandfold, down to
$0.26 per watt. Nuclear power presently costs about $0.50 per watt.
In addition to cost and resource savings, solar energy systems will
not pollute the air or ground water, burn up irreplaceable resources,
or threaten health and lives in the event of an accident. The National
Science Foundation predicts that by 2000 solar energy may provide 35%
of all the energy required to heat and cool buildings and by 2020 the
U.S. may be producing as much energy from solar sources as it did from
all sources in 1970.

A source of fuel and energy which has been heretofar ignored or
overlooked for the most ;art is the prodction of gaseous , liquid, or
solid fuels from organic wastes, otherwise known as biofuels. During

degradation of certain organic materials in a closed system, the heat

of combusition reaches 500 to 700 Btu's per cubic foot. Through such

-12-

a reaction a high quality methane gas may be distilled fifig,the cost of
about $1.33 per cubic foot -- about the cost of substitute natural gas
as is now being produced from a naptha plant in New Jersey.2 °

A similar concept involves the combustion in an airless chamber
(pyrolysis ) of urban wates such as paper, grass, wood, or sewage, and
household industrial, or agricultural wates which amount to over 2
billion tons per year nationally. Such a process, hindered presently
by economics, could supply 3% of the U.S. needs and have the very bene-
ficial side effect of disposing of great amounts of urban waste which
would otherwise have to be either buried or uselessly burned. St Louis
is currently engaged in a program of burning its paper wates to create
steam heat and electricity for a number of its Central Business District
buildings.

Thus, an array of energy sources are available, but for us to
produce the required amounts of energy new technologies must either
be refined or newly developed. A number of political, environmental,
and economic hurdles stand in the way of complete development of all
existing energy resources but if these can be managed we will make it

to the day when the sun can be harnessed for all the power we need.

-13-

C. Some Implications

Because it is difficult and unlikely that we may find new tech-
nologies in "old" energy sources such as coal or oil which may signifi-
cantly increase our energy supplies over the next 25 to 50 years, and
major advances in the generation of electrical power are generations
away, it is imperative that the planners and policy makers of our
society work to institute new patterns of living, building, and
consuming in order that the energy which is available and affordable
may be used to deliver a satisfactory level of well being for all. As
stated in the preceding sections, the remainder of this century will
bring decreased supplies of natural energy and higher energy prices.

To combat this trend, large scale policy changes will be required, one
of which may be a fundamental restructuring of the development pattern
of our urban complexes.

In the past, land use development patterns have been predicated
on the assumption of the continued existence of a cornucopia of cheap
energy. 'Ehe resultant energy demands for transportation of people and
goods, together with a proliferation of buildings which squander energy
for heating and cooling,‘has now locked us into a level of energy con-
sumption which demands a disproportionate and debilitating amount of
our personal and national resources. We must begin now to loosen the
grip which our past decisions have placed us in by taking the requisite
steps to restructure the existing stock of urban land use patterns,
building styles, transportation modes, and activity patterns, and ensure
that new urban growth generates a minimum of energy use, particularly
in the sector of transportation. Changes of this sort will be very
slow, obviously, because of the literally concrete nature of past
development and because of the time required to change the established
habits and custons of the population.

While I am confident that the readjusted energy market will pro-
duce some changes in urban form and urban activity patterns toward
a conservation of energy resources, the magnitude of such transfor-
mations, the time scale in which they will evolve, thier duration, and
the specific elements of the urban complex which will be affected

remain a matter of educated speculation. It may just be that people

-1h-

will decide that they prefer their current styles of life and energy
consumption levels so much that they resolve to pay whatever the cost
may be to purchase all and any resource available to forestall the
alteration of their ways. While this is unlikely, in an estimation of
future trends and developments the strength of factors such as consumer
behavior, resource availability, resource price, technological achieve-
ments, social and demographic developments, and politics (both domestic
and international) must be considered. Resource price and availability
are subjfit to a number of outside influences. It may be that prices
will continue to rise and availability will not be increased so that
energy conservation becomes an essential consideration in personal and
governmental policy making. Or an alternative scenario might show a
vast increase in electrical availability with a corresponding drop in
costs so that petroleum and coal use is greatly offset and larger
supplies of gasoline remain available at an affordable price, allowing
the continuation of dispersed urban activity patterns through the use
of the gasoline-powered automobile. Or perhaps social trends may
emerge which result in urban development patterns which serve to
conserve energy, just as the "baby boom" of the 19h0's and '50's,
coupled with suburban expansion,worked to increase energy consumption
significantly.

Based on the most recent energy resource analyses , I believe
that the trend for the remainder of this century will be one of higher
energy prices and decreased availability, especially for gasoline and
fuel oil. Along with this will be a continued economic strain on the
consumer, slowly evolving governmental regulation of energy use, and
a general forced conservation of energy. Urban form will be most affected
by the continually rising cost of gasoline, and the evolution of
advanced mass transit systems will do little to allow the continuation
of the presently dispersed and horizontally segregated urban pattern.
Just about the time that gasoline price and availability reach unbear-
able dimensions, major breakthroughs will be recorded in electrical
power generation and non-fossil fuel energy alternatives will become

price competitive. By this time, I believe, the momentum toward a

-15-

more compact city will be irreversible. Even if acceptable battery
powered autos are developed, I feel that the sort of unstructured
horizontal growth we have recently experienced will not be revived.
Just what forms will replace it, I will elaborate upon in a later
section.

Planners must take into consideration more than just straight-
forward economic cost in their policy-making deliberations. I, for
one, feel that there is a wide range of issues to be addressed
in the formulation of future energy policy. This is a fundamental
problem, demanding that we reassess our definition of "growth",
our criteria for individual and collective well being, and our
ideals of life. Many Americans have reached a point of consumption
saturation while numerous others have yet to achieve a decent standard
of living. For the poor to bear the costs of energy savings, the
necessity of which has been largely created by those who have profited
in the past, would be a grave injustice.

We must reject the "more is better" ethic, replacing it with
one of "enough is best", otherwise all that our efforts at increased
energy efficiency --small cars, mass transit, industrial re-engin-
eering -— can achieve is to buy five, ten, or perhaps fifteen years
of additional time. Thereafter, the demand for energy will resume
its former rate of exponential growth and son confront us with the
same problems we had sought to escape but merely deferred and inten-
sified. What is needed is a willingness to make rather fundamental
changes in our economy and our values. As Barry Commoner pointed
out, the increased consumption of energy does not necessarily mean
that we live markedly better. Are we better off, say, because
trucks instead of railroads haul freight? Or because we live at
greater distances from our jobs and drive bigger cars?

The "future is now" because of the long lead time required to
develop new, cleaner sources of energy and to re-mold those factors
which dictate our consumption patterns so that we may achieve large

and significant changes. If we are to balance U.S. energy supply

-16-

and demand in the decades ahead in an environmentally acceptable
manner, we must make the basic policy choices and decisions now.
We face the imperative that Edmund Burke stated well almost two
centuries ago when he wrote:

"The public interest requires doing today those
things that men of intelligence and good will
would wish, five or ten years hence, had been
done." 2h.

The role of government -- at least in terms of providing
leadership -- will need to be more sharply defined. Urban and regional
planning must be recognized as having greater importance, be given
a more prominent and influential role in the governmental mechanism,
and expand in scope and power. New governmental programs will have
to be initiated if the changes needed are to be achieved.

Also requiring scrutiny is governmental policy in regard to
the so-called free market system. Presently there is such a
plethordbf governmental regulations, tariffs, and subsidies involved
in the market system that it is hardly the free system it is billed
as. Many governmental constraints actively encourage energy use and
maintain artificially high energy prices to the detriment of the
greater part of the population. I question whether the market system
can wisely plan for the future, whether it can develop the required
new energy resources by itself, and whether it can lead us out of our
energy straits without increased governmental assistance. The free
market system brought us the non-returnable bottle and the glass
building. Will it take them back? Unless governmental policies are
refined so that they encourage energy conservation and work to
establish realistic fuel prices, it is doubtful that free enterprise
can act to use energy more wisely.

Those who attempt tddepict a wisely planned conservation-oriented
society as coerseive or stagnant are drawing a false picture. There
is nothing coersive about a society in which buildings do not leak
heat; in which people get to work by rapid transit rather than by
driving cars; where short trips are taken by high speed rail rather than
by flying or driving; and in which the products of society are built

to be durable and recyclable. It is a matter of re-ordering priorities

—17-

and channeling investments into energy saving activities rather than
into more power plants and refineries. Such a society need not be
stagnant. Recreation, education, performing arts, farming, health care,
research and development, and high technology would be some of its
growth industries.

Finally, in addition to the constraints of cost and environmental
preservation on our growth in energy production should be added a moral
constraint. If all the peoples of the world are eventually to enjoy
an adequate level of well-being, we will need to adopt a new ethic which
regards waste as a form of crime. For if we continue a self-indulgent,
disposable society where the cycle continually is to dig, burn, build,
and then discard, we are stealing from our children and grandchildren
the planet's resources. Infinitely better and more rewarding benefits
from the oil we are currently burning may well be discovered by the
petrochmical industry in the future. Our energy appetite and its
consequences should cause us to question the whole structure of our
material-oriented, energy-intensive pattern of industrial production,

our wasteful urban forms, and at bottom, the basis of our civilization.

-18-

III. EFFECTS OF EXISTING URBAN FORM ON ENERGY CONSUMPTION

In this section I will briefly examine those elements of the
modern urban complex which the largest portion of energy consumption
may be attributed to and which are within the realm of influence by
the urban planner. The conclusions which are drawn from these obser—
vations will serve as a basis for the changes in urban form and structure
which I will present in the next section. Of course, a great deal
of energy use is attributable to sources such as industry, inter-city
transportation, and home appliances, which are outside the realm of
the planner's influence, and to sources such as heating, cooling, and
lighting which can only be marginally affected by planning decisions.
But a full one-quarter of the total U.S. energy budget is within a
sector which may easily be affected by urban form, and that is trans-
portation.

More than half of all transportation energy, 1A% of the total
U.S. energy consumption, and more than 30% of the toal U.S. petroleum
demand, goes to fuel automobiles alone. Most of this expenditure
takes place within urban areas. There are twice as many cars on the
road now as in l9h6 and the average American drives twice as far now
as in that year. This increase in driving and gasoline consumption is
in direct correlation with the dramatic changes which have taken place
in the nature and form of our cities in the past thirty years and has
become a significant element of our annual energy demand.

Energy demands for the heating and cooling of buildings, which
requires about 20% of the U.S. energy budget, are primarily the respon-
sibility of the architect but the planner may also play a significant
role in energy conservation in this sector as his decisions critically
influence the architect's designs. For instance, general development
guidelines drawn up by planners for architects' use in the design of
buildings in a redevelopment project may dictate building orientation,
size, and even the percentage of wall area taken by windows, or a

general guideline regarding energy efficiency in architectural design

may be included.

_l9_

Energy demands for both transportation and building heating and
cooling are influenced by land use. This broad topic includes such
subtopics as the arrangement of activities within the urban area, the
number and type of structures on a particular parcel of land, and
the interrelationships of the various elements of the city (transportation,
industry, commerce, housing, and open space) with each other in respect
to geographical location and generation of human activity patterns. It
can be shown that a direct correlation exists between the general
Inature of the land use pattern and the transportation energy demand for
various cities of comparable size, as well as between the land use
model and building heating/cooling requirements for cities in similar
climates. Land use is definitely within the concern and persuasion of
the urban planner and, thus, will be the primary topic of concern of
this paper.

A very interesting and revealing analysis of the variations in
energy consumption produced by different residential land use inten-
sities was created by the Real Estate Research Corporation.25° Six
types of communities were examined along with six neighborhood housing
types, and the relative costs in terms of annual energy consumption
and developable land were estimated and compared. The five types of
communities were:

I.) Planned mix (20% each of housing types a — e);

II.) Combination mix (housing mix of 20% of each of types
a - e of dwellings, half located in planned unit devel-
opments, half in traditional subdivisions);

III.) Sprawl mix (20% of housing types a - e);

IV.) Low-density sprawl (entire community is single family
detached housing, 75% on a traditional grid pattern
and the rest clustered. Typical subdivision development.);

V.) Low -density planned (75% type b, 25% type a);

VI.) High-density planned (forty per cent high-rise, 30%
walkups, 20% townhouses, 10% clustered single family
houses. All dwelling units are clustered into contig-
uous neighborhoods, much in the pattern of a high-
density new community.)

The six types of neighborhood housing analyzed were:
a.) single-family conventional
b.) single-family clustered
c.) townhouses clustered

d.) walk-up apartments

-20..

e.) high-rise apartments

f.) housing mix (20% each of 1-5)

To no one's surprise, the report concluded that high residential
densities require less energy for heating, and that high densities and
the "planned" communities stimulate less auto use. More specifically,
"planning" alone can save nearly lh% of the total energy consumed, but
"planning" combined with increased density can save up to hh% of the
total. In addition to greateqbnergy economy, higher densities also have
the benefits of generating 20 to 30 per cent less air pollution (due
to reduced auto use) and are more "efficient" in the use of land. With
equal populations, over 50% of the land in the high-density planned
community remains completely undeveloped, whereas all the land is at
least partially developed in the low-density sprawl community. The
high-density planned community also uses only half as much land for
transportation as does the low-density community.

The comparative analysis of energy consumption (in billion Btu's
per year) for each of the six community development patterns is detailed
and accounted for below.

Type I: 86% of III; the difference reflects the variation
in gasoline used in auto travel. Natural gas and
electricity consumption are a function of housing
type, with apartments consuming less than single
family homes.

Type II: 92% of III; the difference reflects the variation
in gasoline used in auto travel.

Type III: Approximately 3,281 billion Btu's per year.

Type IV: 92 % of IV; the difference reflects the variation
in gasoline used in auto travel.

Type V: Approximately h,060 billion Btu's per year.

Type VI: 56% of IV; the difference reflects variations in
residential power consumption by housing type and
the decrease in auto use in high density areas.

It can be seen that the high-density planned community, which

has only 10% of its housing stock as single-family detached units,

-21..

and in which all dwelling units are clustered into contiguous
neighborhoods, requires the least amount of energy for heating,
cooling, and transportation purposes.

In graphic form, the energy demands of the low, medium, and

high consumption community types appear thus:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4000 .—
3000-— T
2000__ T T R= residential heating
Billion 1000.. R t= transportation
R R
Btu's/year
10w combination high
density mix density
sprawl sprawl.

The reasons for the lowered levels of energy use in the higher
density, better-planned communities are not difficult to guess. First
of all, auto transportation demands are reduced in both frequency and
length by locating points of numerous trip destinations (work, school,
shopping, recreation) closer to points of trip origin (primarily home
and work), thus making walking and bucycling feasible alternaive
transportaiton modes; a single trip may serve two purposes, such as
work and shopping or work and recreation; the operation of public
mass transit is made feasible and economic because sufficient numbers
of residential units can be located in close proximity to bus
or rail stopping points while numerous trip destinations may likewise
cluster around other stops, a characteristic not possible with low-
density, scattered communities; the distance between origins and destin-
ations may be shortened through the reduction of "machine space"

(land area devoted to auto circulation, parking, and service) per
developed land parcel through the increased use of a vertical arrange-
ment of land used and the consequent shifting of transportation modes
from auto to public transit.

This last point about "machine space" should not be overlooked.

._22_

In Los Angeles and Detroit 70% of the downtown area is devoted to the

automobile.2 Thus, when you drive your car in from a low-density area,
what you find when you arrive at this supposed center of activity is,
primarily, just a lot more roads. More roads generate more cars which
generate more roads, ad nauseum, until people get sick of so much driving,‘
of having their lives dominated by a machine meant to serve them, and

of paying for increasingly expensive gasoline.

The reasons behind the energy economy of heating and cooling
higher density communities is also elementary. It is easier to heat
and cool the smaller volumes of air encompassed by apartments and
townhouses than the space created by single family dwellings. Addition-
ally, when units are cuddled together shoulder to shoulder and top to
bottom the amount of exterior surface exposed to the elements is reduced
from what it would be if the same units stood independent of each other,
keeping the units warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer.

This brief observation of the major uses of energy which are
amenable to change by urban planners illustrates the importance of wise
land use planning, the necessity of a more intensive use of developable
land, the need for reform in zoning law, and the value of a widely
accepted public mass transit system. When energy for transportation
propulsion was cheaper and more easily available, the inefficient use
of land, the waste of travel time, and the pollution of the atmosphere
were more easily lived with. But now that people are coming to realize
the adverse effects of the rampant use of the auto and its ramifications
in terms of urban development , community liveability, monetary cost,
and energy demands for transportation and space conditioning a shift
is very slowly beginning to be made in people's mentalities regarding
what form an urban complex should take.

This readjusted conception of the interrelationship of the entire
spectrum of city systems will begin to be manifested in the future forms
of urban development and redevelopment. The changes will be slow and
probably not painless but the themes which will soon emerge will probably
dictate to a great extent the nature of our urban form in this country

for the next century. In the following section I shall elaborate on

-23-

what I foresee as the general systems description of an urban complex
of twenty-five or thirty years hence which is evolving or has evolved
into an acceptable state of energy economy given the predicted levels

of energy cost and availablity together with slightly revised social

and cultural norms.

-2h-

IV. FUTURE URBAN FORM
A. Goals and Objectives

A revised urban form based on ecological and social planning
principles will be in opposition to many (but not all) of the basic
concepts around which our present cities are built. Planning has
played but a minor role in guiding the development of nearly all of
our urban centers and land use has been arranged by the forces of
the so-called free market system. Thus, to a great degree we are
still living with heavy industry along the river, freeways through
the hearts of residential neighborhoods, bedroom communities in
suburbia, and warehouses ringing the downtown, which nearly closes
up completely after six in the evening. Urban design and planning
was completely unheard of until just recently and still the tools
which are needed to carry our the goals of such endeavors reamin
to be developed in this country to a degree whereby planners are
able to effectuate their schemes with success on anything more than
the smallest of scales in most cases.

Moreover, there were no goals or objectives for the growth
of a city until recent years other than the basics of sanitation,
public protection, and the right to use one's property as one
wished. Relatively recent developments in controlling and guiding
urban development have arisen but have tended to be piecemeal and
short term with little or no comprehensiveness and even less
hope for a solution to the larger problems which beset cities.
Given the status of urban planning in this country, its relation
to the decision-making elements of the government, and the nature
of land ownership rights under the Constitution it is not sur-
prising that greater gains for planning have not been achieved.

Aside from the fact that planning since World War II has had
little or no political clout or comprehensiveness, it has suffered
as greatly from the fact that it also has been largely lacking
of any underlying goals or philosophy other than the fragmentary

-25-

and mutable suggestions of the social scientist and the heavy-handed
influence of the economist and engineer. What the field of urban
planning requires now and our cities desperately need is a strong
new philosophy around which can be clustered the developing know—
ledge of the social sciences and the pragmatism of economics and
engineering. The goal of such a philosophy would be to create an
urban environment which is more responsive to human needs, which
draws itself more into harmony with environmental demands and
limitations, and which successfully combines form and function.
I, therefore, propose three "new" goals for urban design:
1.) Build an economic purpose for urban growth which stresses
the long-term costs of maintaining equilibrium in
the built environment over the short-term costs of
development.
2.) Develop a large scale view of the community as a
set of associations in which the diversity of community
needs is met not by supplying ever increased
mobility but by building greater diversity into a
tight knit arrangement.
3.) Institute an aesthetic built on form as a natural
adaption for survival.
Each of these purposes requires some change of attitude on
the part of industrialized nations. The first of these, a revised
economic attitude, seems to fly in the face of all our established
notions about supporting urban growth, whether held by a capitalist
or a socialist society. An unfortunate short-term solution to the
energy problems which have beset us ( and will remain with us for
some time to come) would be to hold to the old attitude and continue
the old methods of supplying increased demand with more oil drilling,
more strip mining, more nuclear plants and so on in a desperate
attempt to keep a wasteful system_running. A new attitude is
required that will make long-term conservation of our natural resources
a governing purpose for design.

The second goal requires a change in the way we achieve the

-26—

associations that make up a community. The basic components of
any association of buildings are those that allow us to be housed,
to work, and to shop in some balanced combination. The automobile
has allowed the past two decades of urban growth to space these
basic functions very far apart. The new cities of the southwest
U.S. are spectacular examples of arrangements comprised of large
and specialized segments of housing, commerce, anddndustry. Access
to all three functions requires that people migrate daily, often
over great distances. The development of rapid, public transpor-
tation promises only to maintain the segregation of activities

and people that now characterizes our sprawling cities. An attitude
is now called for that allows diversity of activity in near prox-
imity to become a governing purpose for new growth.

The third goal requires that we change our prevalent atti-
tudes about what constitutes good building design. The governing
criteria must include response to the cyclic forces of nature for
the design of an adaptive architecture that will embody a new
aesthetic. The building of cities must be consciously organized
and limited within the environmental capacity to transform energy
and the human ability to comprehend scuh transformations. If
each of the three design purposes of economics, community, and
aesthetics were restated in terms responsive to the natural envoron-
ment, the result would be a transformation of our existing cities
and a different mode of new growth resulting in the conservation
of energy and our natural environment.

Based upon the three general goals stated above, I have com-
piled ten objectives for future urban form. As stated, they are
rather modest but if they can be met they will be the source of
important changes in urban life and our national energy situation.
The objectives are:

1.) Reduce the use of energy for intra-city transpor-
tation.

2.) Reduce the use of energy for the heating and cooling

-27-

of buildings.
3.) Increase the integration of metropolitan functions
within single communities.
A ) Reduce segregation of mutually compatible land uses.
5.) Greatly decrease urban sprawl.
6 ) Revitalize the role of central community facilities;
renew decaying inner-city neighborhoods.
7.) Improve accessiblity to needed urban functions and
services for all members of the metropolitan area.
8.) Develop a means of intra-city transportation which
is more socially, environmentally, functionally,
and aesthetically acceptable.
9.) Heighten the sense of neighborhood unity and identity.
10.) Instill greater concern for environmentallly valuable
elements such as rivers, lakes, woodlands, wetlands,
etc.; develop a better interface between such areas
and adjacant land uses.
The fulfillment of these objectives in whole or part will
do much to slow the expansion of energy consumption as well as
to make our cities more pleasant places to live. The remainder
of this paper will be devoted to the development of fundamental
strategies which may be employed in the hope of achieving the

objectives.

-28-

B. General Form and Structure

After having discussed the goals and objectives which I feel
should guide future urban development and redevelopment, I would
next like to lay out in a systematic manner how the city should be
regarded for study and what general options are available for
urban growth. Four basic prototypes shall be portrayed, their
working elements explained, and the pros and cons of each discussed.
From these four prototypes one will be recommended as a model for
future urban growth, as an ideal which currently existing cities
can attempt to evolve toward and which new cities may use in their
planning process. Energy economy will, of course, be the outstand-
ing judgemental characteristic but an attempt will be made to take
other economic and social factors into account as well. From
this general framework details will be worked out regarding the
development of the subsectors of the city such as the transportat-
ion network, the central district, and the residential neighborhood.

For analytic and descriptive purposes a city must be pictured
as an abstract entity consisting of a number of human activity
patterns and service networks embodied in a range of physical patterns
of land use and building arrangements. The list of human activities
and physical arrangements exist in a continuum, the particular
arrangement varying from city to city, and within which any given
urban agglomeration may be located. New York, Los Angeles, and Ann
Arbor, although each is vastly different from the other, can all
be analyzed and described in common terms of human activity and
physical arrangement.

"Form" is the term I shall apply to the physical paggern of

land use, population distribution, and service networks. "Structure"
describes the spatial organization of human activities and inter-
relationships. The form and structure of New York City are very
tight while those of Los Angefig are generally very loose. Most cities
in this country lie somewhere between these two extremes but may

also contain limited instances of both very loose and very tight

-29-

form and structure. No city is entirely homogenous in its arrange-
ment; irregularities occur due to economics, topography, and human
nature.

Form and structure are neither antonyms nor synonyms,but,
rather, are complementary of each other; each describes a different
concept and each operates on different ecological levels. Urban
form (the arrangement of buildings) influences urban structure
(the human activity patterns) but there exists also a reciprocal
arrangement whereby the urban structure tends to stimulate and
direct the growth of the urban form. It is highly unlikely that
a city could have a very "tight" form (a number of land uses piled
closely together with a large, varied population) and still exhibit
a "loose" structure (human activities and interrelationships
spread disjointly across a great area). Instead, a person's
activity pattern in a case such as this would tend to be rather
tightly circumscribed and limited since-it is likely that most of
the people and services he would require could be found in a
relatively small geographic area. A person living in Manhattan,
for example, would hardly have need to leave the island to parti-
cipate in most of his usual activities, while a Los Angeleno often
has to take his car to buy a loaf of bread and practically always
has to drive to work.

Urban form and structure are described by their particular
continuous measurement scales. Form is the degree of dispersion
or concentration of urban artifacts and functions while structure
is based on a specialization-integration continuum of human
activities. The dispersion-concentration measure indicates the
tendency of certain functions to spread our over the city hori-
zontally while other functions pile up vertically. Housing, for
example, may be located both near the center as well as on the
outer fringe of a city, while the stock brokers or fruit wholesalers
tend to concentrate near one another for business purposes.

A major force behind dispersion is the propensity to seek

-30-

private space values, a push which has been amplified by automobility
and the increase in long distance communication technologies.
Concentration, on the other hand, indicates close knit physical
linkages at the expense of private space. This may reflect purpose-
ful choice, for example in office shyscrapers, or simply the lack:

of any other choice, as is often the case for low-income and minority
residences. The increased use of the auto and telephone indicates

an attempt to have the best of both worlds -- seclusion and
togetherness -- at different points in time since both have attri-
butes which are to be valued. Concentration increases one's

choice and possibility of human interaction and avails one of more
and varied services while dispersion allows more privacy, space,

and individuality. In choosing a residence, a person makes the
decision as to what attributes he wishes (or needs) to maximize

and what payment he is willing to make to enjoy those character-
istics of residence which his chosen domicile will not inherently
afford him. Residential location is most ideal when the benefits
native to both dispersion and concentration are simultaneously
optimized and external payment (i.e. time and money spent driving

the car or riding the train) is minimized.

The specialization-integration continuum of urban structure
deals not so much with the buildings of the city but with the
human activities which the buildings allow. Urban structure is
a concept which charts the patterns of human movement in the city
over a cyclic period of time, such as a day or week or month.

The question arises as to the scale at which a degree of
integration should take place among the various specialized
activities and functions of a metropolitan urban complex. Special-
ization implies interdependence, with more or less coherent
organization at one or more levels for industrial production as
well as for urban areas. Some pivotal questions need to be addressed
in this regard. Do the elements of a city fit together only at
the metropolitan scale no matter what their size, or are there

limitations of scale for certain everyday urban functions? Is

-31-

the metropolis essentially a single diversified market for housing,
jobs, and leisure time facilities or is relatively balanced and
integrated development feasible or desirable within metropolitan
subareas?

One hundred years ago there existed very little functional
integration at the metropolitan scale; people lived worked, shopped,
and found companionship and recreation in a relatively small area
of the city. The neighborhood was a viable and identifiable
entity which served most of the daily needs of its residents
since transportation to other sectors of the city was largely
nonexistent.. Today, on the other hand, most urban dwellers are
compelled to move all about the city to fulfill these same needs,
as improved transportation means have allowed the segregation of
land uses and the enlargement of activity patterns. But there
are signs of the roots of a rebellion against this life style
typified by suburbia and freeways as many new housing developments
sing the praises of the wide list of other activities offered
within esy reach of the resident's apartment such as tennis and
swimming, shopping, a Ncommunity center", offices and retail trade,
educational facilities, a public transit system, and a park. The
balcony is becoming the fire escape of days past where adults may
share conservation and drink with others.-- maybe even their next
door neighbors. The big back yard (full of grass to be cut and
dandelions to be plucked) is no longer seen by all as the goal it
once was. A move is underway to achieve a concentration of cer—
tain often-sought activities (home, work, shopping, recreation)
while reserving the opportunity to take advantage of other, more
limited and specialized activities offered only at certain points
in the metropolis (live theatre, special interest clubs, special-
ized recreation activities). People may be able to have their

cake and eat it, too.

-32-

Four Future Urban Prototypes

These exists a wide variety of hypothetical choices for
future urban structure based on the variables influencing form
and structure but there are a certain number of limitations to
future forms on all existing and future communities, not the
least of which is the availability and costs of energy. The
choices range from the metropolitan Super-City (a single system
with highly differentiated and interdependant parts) through
various transmutations to a group of smaller urban communities
in a regional setting, each providing for most of the ordinary
economic and social needs of an approximate cross-section of
the urban population.

The disperSion—concentration and the integration-special-
ization continuums present four alternative paths for the devel-
opment of the city, and they may be portrayed graphically in

. 21a.
this manner:

 

DISPERSION
tow rd
gen ral
dispersion
present a constellation
trends f relativel
REGION—WIDE projected °. . . y SUBREGIONAL
[ _. - diver51fied
SPECIALIZATION ‘9 and integratea7 INTEGRATION
cities
concentrated
super city

 

CONCENTRATION

-33-

A projection of present metropolitan trends would result in
region-wide specialization with most functions dispersed but with
a push toward greater concentration of certain functions in central
cities. Such trends are not entirely stable and may well shift
to one of the other alternatives. General dispersion would mean
region-wide specialization of certain functions but a considerable
degree of subregional integration might be induced. The patterns
of a concentrated super-city would exhibit a strong tendency toward
specialized sectors for different functions. Form and structure
in this arrangement would both be very "tight", land intensely
used, accessibility good and private space at a premium. The
last general option -- a concentration of relatively diversified
and integrated cities -- would present the possibility of a range
from moderate dispersion to moderate concentration with cities
of differing size and character within a metropolitan region.

Such an arrangement would best accomodate the diversity of life
styles normally found in a large population.

Each of the alternatives should be measured by how well it
meets human needs (housing choice, job accessibility, class and
race patterns, individual opportunity, social relations, family
welfare and privacy, etc.). But the costs of each must also be
measured (costs of housing, transportation, redevelopment, open
space; broad social costs such as enforced dislocation, destruction
of existing values, waste of resources, etc.).

A number of questions exist as to the feasibility and prac—
ticability of establishing a super-city with region wide special-
ization of functions and activities. One must wonder whether such
region will turn out to look like a big traditional city with
business in the center, industry on the fringe, and a succession
of neighborhoods segregated by income and race. Can such a pattern
be extended over a large area even though it works well on a small
scale? Problems will surely arise with regard to functional and
demographic integration and the unification and coordination of

governmental entities.

-3h-

All this leads the observer to wonder whether the metropolis
is necessarily a single organic system with highly differentiated
parts or whether it is merely an agglomeration of smaller, internally
complete systems which interact only in a narrow band of functions.
There seems to be a scale beyond which functional integration is
not possible nor desirable and at which subregional integration is
necessary. New York appears to have reached that point, along with
several other cities of the world, and further attempts to enlarge
upon the existing corpus are generally counterproductive to functional
stability and the quality of life of its citizens.

Metropolitan unification as one huge city seems unlikely for
a number of reasons. The present trends appear to be toward special-
ized sectors and communities rather than subregional integration;
social divisions between old cities and new suburbs are sharp;
locational specialization of employment and business enterprise,
recreation, open space, housing type and cost, and urban leisure
time activities has created a pattern which poses obvious problems
of extended cross-commuting, of limited housing choice, and critical
tax base discrepencies; class and race conflicts, along with tax
base discrepencies, are leading to deepening political conflict
between central cities and suburbs which makes metropolitan unifi-
cation more difficult unless it is imposed by state or regional
government; and, finally, the class conflicts between suburb and
central city, which appear to have been exacerbated by the force
busing of children to accomplish racial integration of central city
schools, will serve to strengthen the suburbanites' resolve to
remain independent of the central city unless the Supreme Court
decides to include suburban schools in the busing plans, a move which
seems unlikely at best. 28'

Although the American metropolis has in certain ways been moving
toward a vast city style strucutre with highly differentiated and
interdependent parts, and there has been no conscious countermovement
to encourage a greater degree of functional balance and self-containment
within subregional sectors, the actual metropolitan unification

under a single government does not appear to be a liklihood for

-35...

the reasons stated above. Even though metropolitan unification of
all services and functions is not down the road, there is no good
argument against the subregional specialization of certain selected
functions, for we do not really know to what degree and forwhat
specific purposes the entire region is necessarily a single system.

For instance, certain functions which used to be integrated
on a city-wide scale are now showing trends which favor some form
of subregional specialization. It was assumed in the past that
certain activities could only be encompassed to a significant
degree on the metropolitan scale, e.g. special consumer demands which
brought people to central districts. If a tight multipurpose
center has the stimulating and universal advantages claimed for
it by central city saviors, then a large,metropolitan region should
probably have several such centers to serve the potential demand.

The critidal questions regarding subregional integration vs.
metropolitan segregation are the ones stemming from the spatial systems
of residence and employment. Even today these two systems seem
to be very much in geographic congruence. Census data and recent
studies show that the number of employed persons who manage to
live and work in the same subregional sector may be surprisingly
high, considering the limitations of choice in the housing market.29'
It seems that technology has not yet overcome the friction of space
for the metropolitan commuter and that, given the proper housing
and service opportunity, people may choose to live in the same
geographic sector of the metropolis as they work.

The possibility of greater functional integration of activites
within metropolitan regions is bolstered by the fact that the
present trends in housing may shift toward a somewhat wider balance
of population in both outlying areas and the central city as a result
of court decisions on zoning cases and through influences from
state and federal government. If planners take advantage of such
trends, the nature of the form and structure of the city may be

in for some dramatic changes from the way we know it today, resulting

-36-

in (among other things) a great savings in transportation energy.

Alternative Directions for Urban Form and Structure

There appear to be four basic developmental alternatives for
the future form and structure of American metropolitan regions
and cities in general: (1.) the continuation of present trends,

(2.) decentralization based on the auto and modern communications
technology, (3.) centralization and higher densities, and (A.)
constellations of self-contained communities abutting a revital-
ized central city.

Should future urban development assume a similar nature to that
of the last twenty years (Alternative 1), with a continued emphasis
on suburban living and sustained economic growth of the suburbs
to the detriment of the central cities, the problems which presently
hound healthful metropolitan (particularly central city) develop-
ment will only be exaggerated. The current difficulties of accessi-
bility will find no solution as the automobile will remain the only
viable form of transportation in spite of soaring fuel costs.

Some metropolitan mass transit will be developed through
massive federal expenditures but it may not find sufficient accept-
ance by the middle classes, which it requires for true success,
since points of origin and destination will continue to be largely
limited to the cyclic commuter's trip between home and work.

The multi-functional centers of residence, service, employment,
and recreation will not develop should present trends continue.
Only a private vehicle can properly serve the widely scattered
points of interest which form the nature of taday's activity
patterns.

The installation of public mass transit linking existing centers

will surely serve to strengthen them, and with some additional

-37-

aid functional nodes may develop at stopping points along its route,
but the urban form and structure which is being enhanced is not the
most desirable one available. Transportation energy costs will
remain very high with such a pattern despite the overlaid transit
system because of the continued dominance of the auto and the
unfeasibility of walking and bicycling to most destinations.

Additionally, there are costs of other sorts inherent in
the present trends. Social and political schisms will not be
lessened, there will likely remain an inadequate choice of housing
and services, and costs will continue to rise, particularly for
housing and transportation. But most critical to the topic of
discussion here is the fact that the energy demands featured by
the continuation of present trends are simply unacceptable.

The second urban development alternative, general decentral-
ization and dispersion of activities, is based on the misguided
premise that the auto and modern communications can alleviate any
difficulties which may be induced by the separation in space of urban
functions. Proponents of such a pattern place highest value on the
suburban home and the lifestyle it entails, support the "community

30.

without propinquity" model described by Melvin Webber and

a
hold the Los Angeles area as a model for the future. Without
malice, many "decentralists" favor the concept of allowing the
central city to decay, not sinking any more public funds into it

so as to ripen it for proper redevelopment on a grand scale at

some appropriate point in time.3l'

From an energy standpoint, this is the most unacceptable
prototype available. Transportation energy use is pushed to its
maximum, as any chance of viable public mass transit is crushed,
the auto is required to go almost anywhere, bicycle and pedestrian
transportation alternatives prove unacceptable for all but a very
limited number of trips, and the trips taken by auto prove to be
greater in length tham those in any of the other three developmental

alternatives. The sprawling expressways, designed to handle the

-38_

voluminous number of cars at high speeds, succeed in only generating
more cars which reduces their swiftness and requires more land
and a greater separation of functions. Additionally, heating and
cooling energy demands are greater in the decentralist model since
it implies that residences be single family detached units and
not the more energy efficient apartments.

Central core vitality is effectively destroyed by this scheme
and subregional centers fail to achieve true success since only
a partial serving of the needed functions is offered, the remainder
available at some points a few minutes drive away. Instead of
subregional integration of functions and services, a complex
chain-like system of overlapping catchment areas is developed
for daily activities, extending outward indefinitely. Technology,
while overcoming distances, is not really amenable to creating
the kind of community which provides contacts and responsibilities
that cut across special interests creating common ground and stim-
ulating nutual adjustment and integration. Specialization, without
an effective framework for integration will not benefit the common
interest.

The third alternative, a concentrated super-city, would be
in many ways the opposite of the preceding model. The super—city
requires metro-wide integration of most all functions in the various
subsectors, high or medium population densities throughout its limits
with a halt to scattered fringe development, high population densities
at the city "core", apartments in the suburbs, mass transit which
serves all areas, and a marked decrease in reliance on the auto.
Pedestrian enclaves in the city would be required and surrounding
open spaces would be preserved by eliminating suburban sprawl.
Land would be intensely used and all buildings would necessarily
be multi-story. Land use would be segregated both horizontally
and vertically, with many central area buildings containing a
vertical integration of retail shops, offices, and residential
units. (This theme will be further elaborated upon in the section

on central city architectural innovations.)

-39-

This would be the most acceptable solution from an energy stand-
point. Many daily activities and functions would be within walking
or biking distance and practically all would be accessible by
transit. If the city were planned and developed properly there would
be no need for a private car at all except for occasional forays
out of town. Additional energy savings would be scored in the
category of residential heating and cooling due to the great number
of apartments.

Perhaps the ultimate example of a concentrated city is that
proposed by George B. Dantzig and Thomas L. Saatz, entitled "Compact
City".32° Designed for a population of 250,000, the entire city
would be embodied in a structure 8,800 feet in diameter and 2A2
feet in height. Apartments on eight levels would form the peripheral
rings of the city while the core would contain shops, manufacturing,
offices, educational facilities, hotels, and other public facilities.
Most internal transportation would be by foot, bicycle, or mechanized
"people mover". All air would, of course, be circulated and cleaned
by mechanical means. There would be extensive use of mechanical
vertical circulation (elevators and escalators), fixed rail transit,
and an automatic delivery system for small objects.

Dantzig's proposal is completely unfeasible when considered
in light of our social, economic, and political environment, However,
many of the ideas presented, especially those regarding vertical
and horizontal movement of people and goods, the need for greater
proximity between home, work, shopping, and recreation, and his
total-system planning approach may be useful when applied to new
developments in existing cities on a smaller scale. Also interesting
is his emphasis on the city as a place which should foster the per-
sonal interaction of a large, heterogeneous community of people.

The creation of a super-city which actually works and is not
just an overgrown urban area (dare I suggest New York?) will need

supporting policies at all levels of government and will require

-h0-

a strong and effective regional governmental body, as the demands
of the super-city will extend far beyond its corporate boundaries.
This city would require huge amounts of state and federal assistance,
for the costs of its transit system and central city redevelopment
will be very high. Due to the high degree of functional and social
specialization in the various sectors, structures and subareas
would have to be carefully designed to fit particular activities.

Finally, there are a number of broad social costs and dangers
inherent in a city of such high population densities which are not
easy to measure or quantify but are unarguably present. Even the
best of designs cannot fully alleviate the tensions brought on by
such a mass of humanity living in close quarters with limited
provisions for privacy nor can the cityscape provide the spiritual
and bodily refreshment offered by communion with natural surroundings,
which appears to be so essential to Man's psyche. And what is the
fate of the numbers of people who cannot afford spacious living
quarters nor periodic travels to the countryside? Such human
costs must be carefully considered before such high density
schemes are advocated for larger proportions of the population than
already are forced to deal with them presently.

The fourth developmental alternative proposes a system which
is somewhat similar to the central city/suburb pattern which
exists today with one important distinction -- each separate
governmental entity would be much more self—contained and diver-
sified, having a greater integration of the range of functions
formerly offered at the metropolitan level. That is, within each
community there would be a much greater selection of housing,
recreation, shopping, and employment than currently is offered,
and in each community there would be developed a commercial/office/
institutional center somewhat similar to that which exists (or
used to exist) in the central city.

Attempts would be made to integrate within each community
as great a variety of the desired range of services and functions

as feasible without creating a diseconomic overlap and duplication.

-h1-

Certain services which serve a limited market and which could not

be sustained only by the population of a single community would have
to continue to draw from more than one community, perhaps from the
entire metropolitan region. But an end would be put to the "bedroom
community" as we know it today, or any other type of community

for that matter which contains only a limited scope of activities
that are needed daily to the exclusion of others.

The old central city might remain strong for region-wide
functions and highly specialized activities but would generate
relatively less employment and have a more balanced population with
mixed densities and dwelling types. The central city CBD will
decline in relative but not absolute importance. The cities of
the metropolitan region would be of a more uniform size than today,
would be rather close knit in a regional network, and would be of
a much more compact nature. Densities would not need to be high
but a perponderance of medium residential densities, say in the
neighborhood of ten to twenty dwelling units per acre, would be
needed to allow transportation modes other than the auto to be
feasible and attractive. The great amount of land which is saved
by these higher residential densities and reduced raodways could
be devoted to open space for recreation.

The design of the metropolitan CBD could utilize
many of the vertical layering concepts discussed by Dantzig
(and others) and which are currently being revived in the centers
of many of our more advanced urban areas. Including residential
units in an area which for so long has been held as the exclusive
domain of commerce would do much to enliven the area, attract
additional entertainment and retail sales, and ensure that the
center of activity and interest.

Suitable housing for all classes, ages, and race groups would
be provided in each community at mixed densities and related to
the varied employment opportunities in each area. Thus, one would
be much more able to find his choice of housing near the location

of his employment. In each community would be developed a distinct

-h2-

commercial/office district similar to that of the central city CBD
but of a somewhat different architectural style and with a greater
ratio of commercial-to-office functions than the CBD. With residential
and employment areas integrated, commuting between communities would
be low and many activities would become accessible by foot or.
bicycle. Many of the auto trips which did have to be made would
be of a smaller average distance, and mass transit as we know it
today would not be so necessary. Arterial transit would be available
between city centers and other points of high activity,and subarterial
transit would also be provided within each community,but there
would not be such a great demand for movement in the morning
and evening between far-removed residential areas and centers of
employment. Time, money, and energy could be saved and put to
uses more humanely beneficial. Each particular city would, hopefully,
participate actively in the regional planning process with an
increased local citizen interest. In all, there would be a greater
concern for accessibility, diversity, and traditional urban values.
as a balance of city and nature, privacy and opportunity would
be made more easily available.

Clearly, this fourth alternative is the one I favor. It is
also the pattern which our metropolitan areas seem to be moving
very slowly toward, as the suburbs grow in population and add
a diversity of functions. The central city CBD no longer acts
as the commercial center it once was now that many stores have
relocated to outlying centers. Many suburban dwellers rarely
find it necessary to go into the central city, since almost all of
their needs can be satisfied elsewhere. But there are many important
changes necessary before the metropolitan area becomes a multi-
centered city. Employment and housing patterns continue to be out
of step and the various economic classes continue to be widely
segregated. The suburbs must gain a much greater diversity of
functions than they currently contain and their housing densities
and variety must be increased. Although it is unlikely that our

metropolitan areas will be able to undergo change to the degree

-h3_

necessary to achieve all the ideals of this development alternative,
I firmly believe that much can be done to move in this direction
and, thus, build the framework for a much more healthful long-range
development of our metropolitan areas than that which is possible

given the continuation of the present pattern.

-.-m-I_

C. The Important Role 2£_Transportation

 

 

The system of-transportation which is to evolve in our urban
areas may be the critical element of the city of the future, influenc—
ing greatly the working interdependence of the city systems and the
overall quality of life. Transportation influences and is influenced.
by the land development pattern. As such, it will play an instru-
mental role in determining whether or not the tight-grain, multi-
centered pattern advocated here will be feasible and acceptable,
for for land may be used only as intensively as the means of access
and circulation allow. Similarly, the way in which zoning, taxation,
and other public and private forces cause cities to grow and
redevelop will determine which transportation technologies will
be most suitable.

In any case, transportation policies and land development
policies should not be pursued independently of the other. The city
must be seen as an organic whole. One system should not be seen
as either master or servant of the other; they each must be conceived
with the other in mind. In the past, transportation systems have
simply been fitted to the pattern of land development, designed
to serve the existing origin-destination network. this has not
led to the best use of land nor has it produced an efficient
circulation system fro all city residents. Land has been squandered,
functions spread widely apart, travel time increased, and energy
costs have soared.

In this section I will propose an overall system of transpor-
tation based on developable technologies which may realistically be
fitted to the present urban pattern in incremental stages to not
only meet existing circulation demands but, more importantly, to
allow and encourage what I believe to be the needed fundamental
changes in urban form. One of the goals of the system would be

energy economy by three means:

-h5-

1.) reduce the level of energy-intensive transportation
modes, namely today's auto,

2.) reduce the overall per capita demand for circulation
by encouraging the development of a land use pattern
which

3.) allows the widespread use of alternate, low-energy
transportation modes, especially walking and bicycling.

(I should note here, also, that energy economy should not be
the sole criterion for judging the performance of a transportation
system. The ultimate goals of the system should be to provide
affordable circulation to 22$.City residents between all desired
points so as to make all urban opportunities equally accessible.
Energy diseconomy , high operating costs, user limitations, and
poor land use patterns caused by the current system are what

create the inequalities of access we now suffer with.)

Problems with the Existing Transportation System

Today's urban transportation system consists mainly of private
autos which are supplemented by public buses and, in some of the
older, larger cities , by fixed-rail mass transit. Walking and
bicycling are practically negligible. The problems and shortcomings
,of such a heavy reliance on the car have been written about profusely
by many others but allow me to restate them briefly here.

First of all, cars use extensive amounts of precious natural
energy to haul around two tons of machine and 200 pounds of passenger.
They waste money for gas, repairs, and massive infrastructure.

These miles of road also waste valuable urban land. In Los Angeles
35% of the total land area is used for transportation or its related
facilities. Sixty percent of its CBD is devoted to the car. In
Detroit that percentage is 6A, in Washington, A3, in New York, 3h. 33'
It's getting so there is as much area devoted to getting there
as there is places to go. The spent fuel fills the air with chemicals
which damage our lungs and eyes, discolor our buildings, stunt our

plants, and rob us of many beautiful vistas. The quick and easy

-h6-

movement offered by the car has been a prime factor behind the massive
sprawl our cities have suffered in the last thirty years. Distance

is now measured in minutes, not miles,and there is no longer any
compulsion to locate homes, stores, or factories much nearer

each other than the price of land dictates. Neighborhoods and
communities have taken on entirely new meanings as propinquity

is no longer a criterion for community.

The freedom and privacy offered by such mobility has its
price, however, as people have become slaves to their wheels,
and many aspects of neighborliness, diversity, and convenience
which once made cities so attractive have been lost. Gone also
is that sense of human scale in cities; gone is much of the charm
inherent in a series of enclosures and open spaces which a person
could experience best on foot at a walking pace; and gone from
cities to a great degree is the appreciation a person could feel for
the details of his environment and his relation to nature. Not
all urban residents can take advantage of the car's mobility,
either. The elderly, the young, the poor, the handicapped are
practically trapped unless a friend offers a ride or unless they
are brave enough to use public transporation, which offers rather
limited service. Some of these walk or bicycle, which offer
varying degrees of opportunity but still hold many restrictions.

To the enlightened urban planner, the car's effect on land
development patterns have been most unctuous. Such freedom of
movement generates a very "loose" urban pattern. Facilities
tend to be spread all over the map and land development is inclined
to be the least intensive, influenced more by price than access.
Residences and services are designed to cater to the auto more than
the person, and the greatest problem in any new development is not
how to handle the buildings themselves but where to park all the
cars. Thus, the car is not conducive to intensive urban development
at all. In those areas where land prices and certain intrinsic
factors combine to create intensive development, streets are usually

squeezed to a minimum, traffic circulation is then very poor, and

-h7-

other modes of moving people are able to gain a foothold. Liberated
from the need to handle the car, architecture and planning may

turn to serving the person, often with pleasing results. If such
high density nodes can be achieved more frequently throughout the
urban pattern, I believe the problems of access to facilites

in the city will be lessened greatly and urban life improved in
several respects, not the least of which will include a savings

in transportation energy.

The Evolution 2£.§p_Improved Transportation System

Future urban transportation systems will concentrate more on
moving people and less on moving machines, resulting in an energy
savings. A variety of modes will be offered, although the modal
split will not be less than 75% in favor of the auto in 1990.3h'
The auto will remain the dominant mode but each year will witness
a shift from the auto to other modes, resulting in an overall more
balanced system. The Stanford Research Institute concluded that
"a single, all purpose urban transportation system, capable of
satisfying all needs for all urban dwellers, is not expected to
emerge within the foreseeable future, if ever." 35' What is
required in the future is a thirty ot forty year strategy of over-
lapping developments capable of producing harmonious changes in
urban form and transportation habits which would include such
measures as improved autos, more compatible highway development,
support for conventional transit, new transit system development,
personal rapid transit systems, and the development of systems
combining auto and rapid transit alternatives.

If a new family of systems is to gradually supplant the auto
it must’combine a variety of characteristics to meet a diversity of
needs: (1) low speed distribution for short distances, (2) high
density systems within centers of urban activity, (3) fast, high
capacity systems to serve the major portions of trips between home
and employment, retail and recreational concentrations, and (h)
collector systems capable of functioning efficiently between

low—density housing developments and rapid transit stations, shopping

centers, or suburban industry. Increased automation will be important.

-h8_

Origin-destination time will be more important than speed between
stations and, thus, it will be essential that an entire family of
systems be available and that they interface with each other
properly, allowing a traveler to complete his entire journey
with a minimum of walking and waiting. Service, convenience, and
other such factors will be more influential to the ridership of
transit than fares.

Along with major advances in the conventional auto and bus,
such as battery power sources or hydrogen fuels, researchers
foresee three new generic types of transit modes: (1) that for
local area travel of two or three miles, which constitute a majority
of our daily trips, (2) that for extended area travel of relatively
long trips between local areas, centers, satellite towns, or a
combination of these, and (3) that for major activity centers
such as a GED, air terminal, university, or industrial park.35'

Local area travel systems would include the presently—developed
dial-a—ride bus and a public auto system (PAS). These publically
owned vehicles, used for short trips, would seat two or four pass-
engers, have a top speed of 25 miles per hour, and be parked at
conveniently located stations throughout the neighborhood where
they would be picked up and returned. Operational access and billing
would be handled by a computer-coded key of some sort.

Circulation in major activity centers (MAC) could be facilitated
by the introduction of any of a family of so-called "people movers" --
small automated cars or fast pedestrian conveyors, both of which
would operate at speeds of not more than 15 miles per hour on
grade-separated rights-of-way. In Central Business Distircts
a MAC system could serve to circulate people between outlying
parking lots or transit stations and employment or shopping areas.

The system could be designed to fit in tightly with existing structures,
perhaps to even pass through the interiors of buildings, and work
closely with the interior vertical circulation systems.

Extended area travel would utilize both of two systems: (1)

-h9-

area wide network (NET) and (2) fast transit link (FTL). A NET
system would offer direct service between higly diversified origin-
destination pairs distributed throughout the urban area at speeds
rivaling those achieved by an auto on an uncongested freeway. Three
subclasses of the NET system are envisioned and these differ
primarily in the manner and extent to which vehicles can be routed
through the system but also with regard to land requirements,
technical difficulty, and costs. All three would employ small
automatic vehicles, special guideways, and stations. A NET

system would have several advantages over the present auto/express-
way system including increased safety, lessened land requirements,
less air and noise pollution, and less aesthetic intrusion.

The NET-l system, the simplest of the three, would only have
the ability ot route vehicles along a guideway forming a closed
circuit. Area wide networks would be formed by using numerous
loops in interfacing and intersecting patterns. NET—l vehicles
would hold A or 12 passengers. Technology for this system currently
exists.

NET-2 will use four-passenger cars and have the ability to
route a vehicle between any pair of stations within the entire
route complex. Travelers will avoid the delays and burdens of
transfers at intermediate points in their journeys. Although
the costs for a NET-2 system are considerably higher than those
of NET-l, the service improvements are significant.

NET-3 would have all of the capabilities and features of
NET-2 plus the capability of using dual-mode vehicles of a variety
of sizes and types. Cars will be able to operate at low speed
on neighborhood streets as well as being propelled on the guideway
as NET-2 vehicles. The principal advantage of NET-3 is that
travelers who can drive and who have access to a dual—mode vehicle
can make their entire journey, from origin to destination, in a
single vehicle. NET-3 is more nearly ideal than either of the other

NET versions from a service viewpoint. It would offer virtually

-50-

all the advantages of the auto and would offer some services that
could not be obtained from automoated highways. On the other hand,
the technological and financial problems of NET-3 are formidable.

FTL systems are conceived to meet, at least partially, the
desire of travelers for high speeds (two or three times as fast
as NET) and short travel times. FTL's are primarily for travel
within and across the relatively compactly developed portions of
a metro area but may also accomodate much longer trips generated
by moderate to high densities of development. Their use would be
especially attractive for long trips between major activity centers,
e.g., between CBD's of contiguous communities, betweeen CBD's
and airports, in urban corridors, and as links to satellite commun-
ities. Although the concept itself is not new (the B.A.R.T. system
is a current example of this style of transit) there are numerous
advances yet to be made in technology and application.

The development of an area-wide transit system of any type is
a costly, time consuming effort and , thus, needs to be approached
in an incremental fashion. Corridors ought to first be decided
upon to link present and anticipated centers of activity, and
development should proceed first on those with the greatest demand
for linkage. Later, additions may be made to the basic skeleton.
Provisions should be made to ensure proper interface with major
activity center systems, existing transportation facilities, and
the fabric of neighborhoods. Also, planning should anticipate
coming technological advancements in hardware and allow for the
incorporation of new features into "old" systems without undue
disruption or cost. For example, a NET-l system should be designed
to eventually accept conversion to NET-2 or NET-3 status.

Along with such sophisticated mechanical means of transit
ought to come a much less glamorous but nonetheless important
development, a network of exclusive bicycle paths safely separated
from mechanically powered vehicles. While bicycles will probalbly

never prove to be an essential commuting mode in this country, with

-51-

proper facilities and encouragement their use could certainly
reduce the number of short trips which must be made by car for

a good part of the population. They could easily serve as means

of access to transit stations, neighborhood retail centers, schools
and community facilities while providing exercise and relaxation

to riders. In high density areas, bicycles' use could become a

very critical circulation mode whose use we cannot afford to overlook.

Effects gf_Future Urban Transportation Systems 9p Urban Form

 

Transportation has historically been the prime determinant of
urban location and form. The prospects for a deterministic role of
the former magnitude in future urban development is unlikely,
howerver. Other factors, especially amenity factors, will predom-
inately influence future urban growth. The urban pattern, nonetheless,
will continue to be influenced by transportation.

The chief effect on urban form that will result from a shift
from the auto to other transportation modes such as the train,
the bus, or a NET system will be a return to higher intensities
of land development, especially in key nodal areas as directed
by current development and the evolution of the transportation
network. The predominance of the central city CBD will be dim-
inished somewhat with the advent of strengthened secondary centers
of activity in outlying sectors of the central city, in the first
ring of suburbs, and in satellite towns. These centers will include
a major activity such as retail sales or education as well as
supportive supplementary activities as offices, residences, enter-
tainment, restaurants, and public institutions. Diversity and
heterogeneity will be the keywords. The result will be a multi-
nucleated urban form. Access between such centers will be good,
strengthening thier importance, increasing the amount of develd
opment within walking distance of the centers, and further unifying
transporation and land use.

Transporation technology influences how land is used since

-52-

it determines the degree of access available to a given point in
the city; the greater the access to a point for large numbers of
people, the more it pays to develop the land intensively. With
increased development intensity comes added activity, usually
resulting in a demand for residential quarters in proximity.
Thus, the tramsporation technologies employed in the future will
do much to determine whether or not the.goal of functional diver-
sity in a localized area can be accomplished.

The auto has done much to segregate land uses. By providing
equal ease of access to most points in the urban area, it has
caused much leveling of land values and encouraged the city to grow
in a sprawled, scattered pattern. Activities could be widely
separated because they were so easily accessible to each other.

It was possible to live miles from a grocery store, miles from
recreation, and even more miles from employment. Moreover, the
space required for auto circulation and parking required that uses
be spread out simply to make room for all the cars. Thus, we have
bedroom communities inbuburbia, the vast suburban shopping center,
and the deterioration of the CBD.

Transportation modes which increase the channelization of
traffic and do not require parking spaces at the riders' destin-
ations will do much to intensify land development around their
stopping points. This is especially true of fixed-rail systems
which have a somewhat limited number of access and departure points
and, thus, handle many people at these stops. Land values soar
near these points as commercial and employment functions attempt
to take advantage of the good accessibility and riders attempt
to shorten their travel by secondary mode from the station to home
by living nearby. This has taken place in San Francisco where
property values have risen near every one of the B.A.R.T. stations;
the Yonge St. subway in Toronto has ignited a $10 billion develop-
ment explosion along its line.36° Just as the car spreads develop-

ment, the train directs it. Decisions of route and station location

-53-

thus become significant in determining community development and
form.

Somewhere between the car and the train are the bus and the
NET systems. The bus, with many access and departure points,
allows service to dispersed development but at the same time is
inefficient except for relatively short trips or as a collector
for a faster, more direct mode. The NET-l and NET-2 systems,
which demand a modal change between the station and destination
(even if the mode is walking), will tend to increase land use
intensities near their stations but to a lesser degree than would
a train. The NET-3 system offers such ease of access that proximity
to the station would be much less critical and the land use effects
might be similar to those generated by the car with two important
differences: (1) there would still remain a desire to live or
work near a guideway access point and (2) less land would be needed
for circulation and parking.

Therefore, if increased gasoline prices result in a demand
for improved public transporation, if bus service is improved
and fixed-rail systems (including a NET model) are implemented
(or upgraded) there very likely will be a trend toward the devel-
opment of secondary nodes of commercial and office activity sur-
rounded by townhouses and apartments at principal stops along the
transit system. Land will be much more intensively developed
and a wider range of functions available at these centers than is
now the case with non-residential activity areas.

In central areas. there will probably be a layered arrange-
ment of shops, offices, restaurants and theatres, and apartments.
MAC systems will speed people between office buildings, stores,
transit stations, peripheral parking lots, and other points of
activity. (Cars may be banned entirely from the CBD.) MAC systems
will serve to magnify the influence of a point of high accessibility
by extending the range of what would normally be pedestrian activity.
The joint impacts of MAC and NET or FTL systems can stimulate

-55-

enormous concentrations of activity at discrete sties, which the
auto does not.

Development will be infioncentric rings from transit stations,
perhaps even utilizing the air rights above it, in contrast to the
strip development encouraged by the street. Residential neighbor-
hoods will include a much greater percentage of townhouses and
low-rise apartment buildings to facilitate service by bus, foot,
bicycle, and NET-3, as well as by car. Convenience shopping centers
ought to be located within one-half mile of all residences, and
other, larger community centers should be accessible by bus.

Grade schools should be within three-eights of a mile from any
residence and junior and senior high schools and colleges should
be on bus or NET lines.

Overall accessibility to required daily functions should be
increased -by the added diversity encouraged at the new or redevel-
oped urban centers. In time, when residential neighborhoods
become compact enough many activities which usually require a car
(or at least a bus) to get to may be accessible by foot or bicycle.
Less land will be squandered on massive freeways or wide arterial
streets. Neighborhoods will be affected positively rather than
negatively by being near a transit artery. The city will be more
accessible for those who cannot drive and, in some cases, for those
who can, too. Above all (and if nothing else) a great deal of natural

energy will be saved for better purposes.

-56-

D. THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD

In this section I will discuss planning and design improve-
ments aimed at conserving energy in two urban subareas, the
Central Business District and the residential neighborhood.
Changes in building arrangement, bulk, size, and design can go
far to create energy savings in heating and cooling as well as
transportation. Although many of the improvements which are avail-
able at this scale enter the realm of architectural design, there
are a number of fundamental planning principles to consider. The
decisions of planners have profound effect on subsequent architec-
tural design and , thus, should be carefully made. To this end,
I will outline a few basic improvements in the planning and design
of these areas. To many Americans, some of the changes I will put
forth will not be immediatly (if at all) acceptable. However,
observation will show that many of them are already_taking root, and
some foresight may help persuade the reluctant to see the bits of
wisdom in the ideas.

The Central Business District

Although the Central Business District is, from an energy
standpoint, a fairly efficient use of land and transportation
facilities, there remains room for improvement. Architectural and
transportation innovation implemented in the CBD will tend to
bolster the role of the core of the city and strengthen the CBD
as an anchor for the city transit system. A vibrant and vital
city core will induce medium to high density residential develop-
ment at its periphery and act as a magnet, generally pulling
inward new development. The higher central population densities
it fosters facilitate the acceptance of mass transit alternatives.
For these reasons, I am going into some detail to examine CBD
design innovations and advocate their acceptance.37'

The downtown should become the regional center where cultural,

~57-

educational, medical, financial, and other institution, businesses,
and government are tightly clustered. There should be a reintro-
duction of residential life to the city core along with the
recreational and social activities that will keep its going around
the cldk. To help keep the CBD "alive", it should be designed for
people, not cars. Thus, new consideration should be given to the
use of the street and to the movement of the pedestrian. Walking
in the city center should be an enjoyable experience, to be appre-
ciated for itself. Design can make it so.

The first principle of proper activity center design is that
there must be a variety of activities and land uses in a concen-
trated area. This can best be accomplished by a vertical layering
of uses within single buildings. For example, the first and
second floors may be retail shops, restaurants, and theatres to
attract the pedestrian. Above these may be offices, above these,
apartments, and then a club or restaurant atop it all. Throughout
most of the world the varied activities of urban life have taken
place in complex, interlinked structures in the centers of cities.
Commercial enterprises and residential life have been traditionally
juxtaposed in the same building. Mixed use patterns have the merit
of convenience for the people who use them, save transportation
time and energy, and are supported by the logical association of
interconnected activites.

Valuable interior building space may be utilized more economically
through ideas such as a midblock shopping arcade. Small interior courts
open to the sky or covered by glass will stimulate pedestrian inter—
est and increase retail frontage on ground level. Subterrarian
levels should not be ignored, either. All of these ideas will
make the core a more interesting place to be.

The second principle is that the pedestrian should be well
taken care of..The design principle to accomplish this is termed
the "Access Tree" by Rai Okamoto.38 This is an analogy between urban

organization and systems in nature. The "roots" of the "tree" are

-58-

the transit system, the "trunk" is the elevators and escalators
within the buildings, and the "branchesvare the interior passageways,
the second level pedestrian system which links buildings, the
second level mechanical people mover (or MAC) system, and the
sidewalk. This is similar to the principles of personal cir—
culation embodied in the early planning achievements of Grand
Central Terminal-Park Avenue and the Rockefeller Center. It
posits a rational organization of buildings related to horizontal
and vertical transportation systems, expresses the potentialities
of clustering tall structures where access is convenient, and
contains a sense of economy of space and the possibiliites of
diversity of scale in an urban setting.

The pedestrian portion of the "tree" may be the key element
of any multilevel scheme. Properly planned, of stimulating
design, forming a natural pathway between one point of dense
concentration and another, the pedestrian system may constitute
a delightful terminal link in a hierarchy of urban transportation.
This organically whole circulation system, in addition to taking
advantage of the nodal imperative of a transit system, may serve
by its capacity to move people from transit door to office door,
to determine to a good degree the form and bulk of the activity
areas it supports. Essentially, it recognizes and takes advan-
tage of the importance of the mechanical movement systems in

relation to urban form.

The Residential Neighborhood

Since there exist a variety of style of residential sectors
in any given city, I will not write as if all were alike, but
will, rather, speak in general terms about the nature of the
neighborhood, praise goods points which may be found and critize
the bad. In certain instances I will cite specific examples,

but will keep in mind that all neighborhoods do not possess those

-59-

particular characteristics.

What features are desired in a house and a neighborhood by
most Americans? First of all, there are the basics of security,
privacy, sanitation, and shelter from the elements. People need
to be safe in their possessions and self, they need to be able
to escape from others' intrusions and have an abode for their
family alone, There must be hot running water, garbage service, and
proper toilets, and heat in the winter. These are essential but
are lacking for still too many Americans. ‘

Beyond these are needed adequate living space for each
member of the family, a secure, individual sense of domicile
(the archetypal sense of home), some private open space, room to
entertain friends, and peace and quiet. These are provided
(or not provided) to varying degrees according to what sort of
dwelling one lives in and where it is located. The suburban
house usually attempts to optimize these within the buyer's
budget, for they are the added comforts which people will pay
for. With a big yard, free-standing structure, individual house
number, large rooms, and private garage, the suburban house
provides quite a bit of each of the above.

However, given the current design of most apartments, town-
houses, and inner-city houses, these factors are usually lost.
No wonder. Such dwellings are usually-designed with the poor
and/or transient in mind. They are seen as temporary quarters
or simply poorly designed and constructed on very tight budgets.
Such economy can be appreciated only by those who can afford to
pay no more. But as the single family detached house prices
itself out of the reach of even the middle class and as the miles
of suburban road come to be seen as a hindrance rather than an
asset, there will be reborn a kinder image of the townhouse and
apartment. When costs of heating and cooling a big house become
too weighty on a budget, the compact, sheltered design of other
types of dwellings may be appreciated more fully. Now is just

-60-

the time to deflate the bloated image of the single family detached
dwelling and to convince designers, planners, city officials,

tax officials, and residents alike to reconsider the number of
amenities which may be offered by a properly planned and designed
residential community of townhouses and low-to-mid rise apartment
buildings. The tawdy image of these dwellings, so well earned
today, can be erased by building them with a new image and purpose
in mind.

With proper design, I am convinced that an apartment or
townhouse can almost match the suburban house in all of the
amenity factors listed above. There are a number of superb
European examples available and a growing collection of American
achievements, as well. In the ways that an apartment or town-
house falls short of one's desires for living area, individuality,
private open space, or quiet it can redeem itself in other ways.
Energy costs are reduced significantly, maintenance costs and effort
are cut, accessibility may be increased, neighborhood and community
factors may be enhanced, and security may be increased. True, there
are some people who will never settle for a townhouse, no matter
how well designed when they can buy a house in suburbia or in the
country, but for a great number of prospective homebuyers a sat-
isfying alternative is available if only a few preconceptions,
financial factors, and design constraints can be altered.

From an energy conservation standpoint I advocate a dramatic
upsurge in the number and quality of apartments and townhouses
built in the next thirty years. These should be located in com-
prehensively planned sites, in the older parts of central cities,
in the suburbs, and in new towns. Efforts should be made to
provide secure, spacious, comfortable, individualized apartments,
including in the design provisions for recreation facilities,
shopping, community facilities, landscaping, car shelter, a

transit station, and bicycle and pedestrian ways. As large

-61-

areas of the central city grow aged, sites of appropriate size
can be obtained. Buildings over three stOries in height should
be few in number and limited to the childless and those with
infants. Necesgry population density can easily be achieved with
low rise buildings. All dwelling units should have either direct
access to a private yard or an ample balcony. Buildings should
be well insulated for sound and heat, place to take advantage of
solar radiation, and have provisions for the use of alternate
energy sources such as solar collection or central trash burning
for electrical generation.

Properly designed, planned, and implemented, the urban
neighborhood can become just that again -- a neighborhood.
It g§p_offer the advantages of diversity, interest, community,
convenience, safety, and hominess as well as energy_conservation
without saCrificing the desired amenities of privacy, individuality,
or comfort. A challenge is upon us, and it will require imag—

ination, conviction, and confidence to rise to the occasion.

—62-

V. IMPLEMENTATION QE_CHANGE

Planning for change and actually bringing it about are two
entirely different things, the latter being considerably more
difficult and too often not discussed in conjunction with the
other. It is easy to understand why, though, for implementation
is replete with pitfalls, uncertainties, and obstacles. The
scope of change advocated here will be most difficult to accom-
plish in the necessary time frame for it involves a reversal
of a considerable number of forces presently moving in the wrong
direction. Such momentum is difficult to arrest when it is pro-
pelled by social mores, personal habits, legal doctrines, and
institutional custom.

Certain aspects of the evolution to a more energy conser-
vative urban form will be accomplished more quickly than others.
Influencing the rate of change will be the flexibility or perman-
ence of the element in question and the price of energy. Auto
design may be changed in just a few years, transit systems may
take a decade or more to build, but land use change will be a
very gradual process, extending over a number of generations.
Indeed, many of today's buildings may last longer than two or
three generations and some facilities longer yet. Present'rights-
of-way create still more enduring committments.

The force of the present most capable of influencing the
future is man's conception of human settlements. What happens
to cities in the near future will be a result of the continuation
of the past and of existing influences which will only be felt
two to four generations from now. The more distant future,
however, will depend much more on man's conception of future
action and his ability to implement it.

It may turn out to be quite a close race between our ability
to adapt and the advent of new fuel sources which prevent prices

and scarcity from reaching truely painful proportions. As stated

—63-

in the initial chapter, discovered natural gas reserves will be
exhausted in a decade, petroleum production may "peak out" in the
1980's, some authorities suspect there may be only enough recov-
erable fuel for nuclear fission reactors to last us until the
1990's, although the supply of coal could last another 200 years.
Will the nuclear breeder reactor, nuclear fusion, or large scale
solar power be developed in time?

It appears that considerable change will have to had been
affected by 1990 or 2000 to be of any avail. By 2010 or 2020
solar power and an advanced form of nuclear power may be reliev-
ing the pressures brought on by soaring oil and coal prices.

This is sufficient lead time for'many'major improvements to be
made in transportation systems although building and land use
change will lag behind. By the time new technology is able to
bring energy prices back from the brink of unbearability, however,
the movement toward a more compact city will be irreversible and
land use patterns will continue to become more energy conservative.
Legal, tax, and zoning factors which influence land uses must
begin to be altered immediatly. Auto design has laready begun

to change but advances must continue through the 80's and 90's.
All cities over about 70,000 population should at least have bus
systems by the early 1980's, and the larger SMSA's should now

be formulating plans which will result in more advanced transit
systems capable of reaching completion by at least 1990. For

some programs, such as comprehensive transportation plans, immedi-
ate action is needed due to their great importance to the entire
metropolis. In other instances, such as downtown redevelopment
proposals, preparation for dealing with problems may already exist.

The agents for directing the major programs of change will
be public bodies, the Federal,State, and local governments, since
most of the essential innovations require either massive, long-
term investments in the public sector or alterations of laws.
Experience has shown, however, that the government (especially

at the Federal level) does not move quickly on matters of debate.

-6h-

When things go wrong in a highly developed technology top-level
decision making becomes impossibly difficult . It is better that
we learn to make as many desisions as possible for ourselves: the
changeover from the habits of "cheap fuel" to the habits of
"expensive fuel" has to be made by us long before it can be con-
firmed by government. It will, therefore, be necessary that a good
deal of independent stimulus arise from concerned individuals as
well as from private organizations which can be made to see how
they can profit from investing in energy conserving technology,
structure, or real estate. It will be necessary that the public
and private sectors work cooperatively, for the government can not
do the mammoth job itself and private companies can not afford

to make the needed investments without some government aid and some
changes in statutes and taxation. Some very helpful steps have
already been made at all three governmental levels but much,

much more remains to be done.

Agencies of control, particularly at the city‘level, would
have to establish certain long-term policies to coordinate the
efforts of the numerous groups affecting urban development.

Several such policies could be as follows:

1.) Encourage continued metropolitan agglomeration.

2.) Begin to construct a generalized grid of channels for
transporation, adapting its interspacing and alignment
to circumstances, but aiming at raising accessibility
throughout the area as a whole The grid should provide
for many kinds of flow and have a hierarchy of its own --
that is, lines of circulation would be differentiated
with respect to the intensity and speed of their traffic.

3.) Peaks of activity and density should be encouraged, but
in sharply defined areas, not in rings, whose density
gradually declines from the center. The development
of two or more centers to rival the CBD would be
encouraged. These centers could embrace a wide spectrum
of metropolitan activites.

h.) A wide variety of activites, of accomodations, and of

structural character, dispersed in a fine-grain pattern

—65-

should be encouraged. Once the concentration of special
activities and the arrangement of higher densities in
centers and along major channels has been provided for,
zoning and other controls should be employed only to
maintain the minimum grade needed to preserve the
character and efficiency of the various types of use
and density. Large, single purpose areas should be avoided.

5.) The outward spread of the suburbs should be limited
through tax, zoning, and sewer controls to a predeter-
mined time frame and to only those land areas which are
ecologically suited for urban development.

6.) A sustained effort should be made to rebuild older,
deteriorating areas

7.) Efforts should be made to retain or acquire a system of
linked open spaces of generous size that pervade the
urban area.

Except in the very special casesof'Rockefeller Center, Grand
Central Station, downtown Montreal, and a few others such as
Philadelphia's Market St. East, implementation of urban development
schemes planned with and integrally linked to rail transit has been
elusive. Questions of long term ownership structure, legal
responsibility, and development cost sharing ratios usually
destroy the legal, tax, and financing benefits between public and
private sectors' programs and policies that make such plans appear
economically feasible in the first place. The highest priority
should be given to developing legal, tax, and financial mechanisms
to permit the effective integration of urban public transit with
complex new strucutres. It is through such integration that
coherent and congenial experience in the city center is possible.

In the 0.8. the problem of actually producing a well articulated
and well designed family of transit must inevitably involve concepts
and strategies of joint development; that is, development in

which private and public interests intermingle and contributions

-66-

are made from both sides. The private sector can only be expected
to participate when it will materially benefit in some way, such
as through reduced capital costs, improved depreciation potential,
increased potential value, lower assessments, or reduced taxes.
These are exchanged for the commitment of capital, management
talent, land resources, and the determination that is found in
private enterprise at its best. Some joint development strat-
egies are slowly and painfully being worked out in cities, states,
and at the federal level on a case-by-case basis. What is needed
is a defined national strategy, one with real estate investment
and tax realities, to induce private investment to join in joint
development projects with public authorities. The design concepts
and development models are available. The trick is to tailor
the necessary laws, regulations, and economics to our political
and social system.

Another critical matter in this regard is the stimulation of
a more comprehensive understanding of the phpggrdimensional
character of cities, incorporating connections between enclosed
spaces and access to it. ngd_must be forgotten as a basic
resource in cities to which all institutions of finance, ownership,
and regulation are tied. In its place, gpgggJ enclosed, usable
space, must be considered the critical element. Today, as it has
been for centuries, land controls urban financing. Mortgages
are based on land and improvements thereon. Parcel assemblage
for construction generally requires purchase of land. Access to
parcels is almost universally conceived of principally in terms of
roads at ground level.

This preoccupation with land, with the two-dimensional
base in which building are anchored, has caused a predominately
two dimensional concept of cities. If this technologically and
economically outmoded attitude can be broken, possibilities for
more convenient and more successful urban clustering will be

evident.

-67-

One of the very few examples of liberation from the restrictive
concept of land is also a very ancient one. Condominium ownership,
usually reserved for residential space, recognizes the inherent
value of space as an entity. The condominium apartment which
does not generally include land ownership can be mortgaged; and its
value is not directly dependent of the land on which it rests.

It is worth considering the importance of this form of ownership
and financing of urban space as an alternative to our conventional
land dominated basis. It would permit segments, levels, in fact
layers of space to be separately owned. It would even allow the
complex interpenetration of public and private ownership to occur
as needed, and where appropriate. But condominium ownership is
only one possible new conceptual basis for legal and economic
formats that would assist implementation of desirable urban design
concepts.

In the future, planners should give increased attention to
controlling the development of the city infrastructure, its
utility lines, street patterns, and location of vertical lifts
such as elevators and escalators. These should determine where,
how much, and how little can be built. It is being realized
that the capacity of the enclosed environment can be planned,
located, and sized long before construction begins. Through
this strategy, urban areas and suburban districts may be planned
without unduly influencing the future appearance of specific
structures or even the time frame in which they may be built.

With the rise of metropolitan planning bodies, the ability to
regulate the extension of sewer lines may become the most powerful
planning tool available. The Twin Cities Metropolitan Council has
given teeth to its metropolitan land use plan, limiting suburban
sprawl, encouraging central city and satellite town development,
and protecting farmlands, through a combination of state property
tax amendments and a specific time frame for sewer extensions

reaching thirty years into the future. While steering future

-68-

development, such infrastrucutre control can also serve to define
in advance the maximum capacity of all service elements to prevent
future congestion, overbuilding, and poor linkage to streets,

transit, and other buildings.

_69-

VI. CONCLUSION

 

In the preceding sections I have outlined what appears to
me to be a scenario of the development of American urban centers
in the next twenty-five to forty years as influenced by the rising
costs of natural energy and its uncertain availability. Here
is a brief recapitulation of what was presented, followed by
some closing remarks.

Through an inspection of numerous respectable sources,

a concensus of predictions was gleaned regarding future energy
availability, price, and source together with assessments of
current and future U.S. energy needs. It clearly appears that
the U.S. shall have to make it through the remainder of this
century on a restricted energy diet.

An interesting report from the Real Estate Research Corpor-
ation highlighted a brief analysis of how variations in residential
land use and building type can markedly influence energy consumption
in that sector. Sadly enough, the majority of land use and
building design in American cities is highly wasteful of enrgy,
not a surprising result given the abundance of power we have
enjoyed in recent decades.

The examination of energy consumption as influenced by land
use and transportation very neatly set the stage for the intro-
duction of the heart of the paper. In a bold but not unfounded
prediction, I stated that many of our metropolitan areas will
witness the evolution of a new urban form, one in which greater
diversity of metropolitan services and functions will be offered
in every section of the urban area so that circulatin demands
are eased. Suburban sprawl will be sharply curtailed, the
CBD revitalized, older residential sections will receive new
attention, and commercial/office/recreational centers will

mature to rival the CBD. Residential densities will be increased

-70-

in outer areas of the central city and the suburbs, especially
around commercial/employment activity centers and transit station
areas. An overall effort will (or should) be made to shorten

the distances between the basic daily activities: home, work,
school, shopping, and recreation.

An improved family of transportation services will be part
and parcel of this new movement, making it possible and encour-
aging its success. Use of the car will diminish as other modes
enjoy rising patronage. The next twenty years will witness the
completion of new and/or improved bus and rail transit systems.
A system of small (two to six passengers) rail-guided cars,
some of which may ultimately be operable on the street as well,
may evolve to fill the need for fast metro transit in off-rush
hours. With increased walking and bicycling, improved auto design,
and increased use of mass and personal transit systems, trans-
portation energy can be slashed while exerting a profound positive
influence on urban form.

The CBD should regain much of its lost importance as new
residential areas are built on its periphery or its heights,
some lost retail business returns, CBD design becomes more
responsive to the needs and desires of the pedestrian, and
architecture takes greater advantage of the swift movement
of people offered by a transit system and sophisticated interior
pedestrian circulation concepts.

The greatest change in residential neighborhoods will be
the introduction of many new apartments and townhouses, many
with engaging designs accompanied by a number of amenities
desired by middle class residents.

All of these ideas will be worth nought if certain improve-
ments are not made in the governmental, legal, and financial
web of implemenation. A great deal of the stimulus to affect

change will have to arise from concerned individuals and from

-71- o

enlightened private businesses. Land, which has so long dominated
the urban development mechanism, will have to be replaced by

the more sophisticated and realistic concept of enclosable

space. The city must be envisioned increasingly in three dimensions.
And, finally, I believe that planning and planners will be given
greater importance and assume increased influence in the process

of guiding the growth of our cities.

What are the prospects for such changes actually occurring?

To be realistic, I would have to admit that it is highly unlikely
that all the changes will take place to the extent I have described
them in existing cities, although most every city ought to
experience some of the evolution as I have described it. Currently
existing facilities are simply too slowly changed. New towns

will present the greatest opportunity for the development of the
compact design I advocate.

Above all, I hope that this, the second half of the Twentieth
Century, will be looked back upon as a critical period of maturation
of the American metropolis. I hope that our efforts to conserve
energy result not simply in an energy efficient city but in a
city which is also a delight to live in, which offers opportun-
ities, convenience, health, and personal happiness. I believe
that these energy shortages will turn out to be beneficial for
the city in the long run by initiating a movement which will
result in a wiser, more productive use of land, a revitalization
of the central core, and a renaissance of the residential neigh—
borhood. To accomplish such goals we must possess two qualities
above all: one, conviction that changes need to be made and, two,

confidence that beneficial change is indeed possible.

FOOTNOTES

1 ) "Energy: End of an Era?," Commonweal, 99:527—530, March 1,197h.
2.) "Clean Power from the Sun," Nation, 217:h29_h32, October 29, 1973.
3 )

From 1960 to 1970 annual sales of window air conditioners jumped
from 2,75 million to almost 5 million.

A.) "Energy Options: Challenge for the Future," Science, p. 9,
September 8, 1972.

5.) "Energy Supply," Newsweek, 82: 71—72, July 9, 1973.

O\

) "Energy Sources of Tomorrow," Nation's Business, 62: 21-22,
February 197A.

 

.) Freeman, David 8., Energy: The New Era, (New York, 197A), p. 65.
.) Ibid., p. 91.
.) Ibid., p. 101.
10.) "Is There an Energy Crisis?," The Public Interest, 35-h2, Spring 1973.
11.) Robert R. Grinsted, "Bottlenecks," Environemnt,glh:3, April 1972.

 

\OCD-Q

12.) Freeman, op.cit., p. 38.

13.) Ford Foundation, A_Time pg Choose: America's Energy_Future, p. 79,

l97h.
lb.) Freeman, op. cit., p. 107.

 

15.)Freeman, op. cit.,p. 88-89.
16.) Grinsted, op. cit., p. 5.
l7.) Freeman, op. cit., p.5.

18.) "Energy Joyride is Over," Bulletin 92 AtomiE_Scientists, 29:39,
October 1973.

19.) Freeman, op. cit.,p.9l-95.

 

20.) Freeman, op.cit., p.98.

21.) "Fusion Reactors as Future Energy Savers," Science, 186:397-h07,
November 197h.

22.) Farno L. Green, "Energy Potential from Agricultural Field Residues,"
Michigan Free Press, September 1, 1975, p. 2.

2h.) Freeman, op. cit., p. 2hl.

25.) Real Estate Research Corporation, The Cost 22 Sprawl, (Washington,
l97h).

26.) Ronald L. Howath, "Machine Space," Geographical Review, p. 168.

27.) A service network is the physical placement in a city of resources,

whether they be grocery stores, banks, hospitals, schools, churches,
or indoor tennis courts.

27a.) Adapted from Wolf, Peter, The Future 93 the City, (New York, 1979),

35.)

36.)

37.)

38.)

 

p. 151.
Ibid. p. 57.
Ibid,, p. 61.

Webber, Melvin, "Order in Diversity:Community Without Propinquity,"

Cities and Space, (ed. L. Wingo, Jr.), Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
Press, 1963.

Anthony downs, "The Future is Demographic Change," Robert W.
Burchell (ed.) (New Brunswick, N.J., 1975), pp. 305-323.

Dantzig, George B., Compact City (New York, 1973).
Rudofsky, Bernard, Streets for People, (New York, 1969), p. 11h.

Burco, Robert S. and David A. Curry, Future Urban Transportation
Systems: Impact pp Urban Life and Form, (Washington, 1968), p. 105.

The majority of the comments regarding innovative transit
possibilities, in particular the PAS and NET systems, were gleaned
from Burco, 1968.

Stone, Tabor R., Beyond the Automobile (Englewood Cliffs, 1971),
p. 87.

It should be noted that many (if not all ) of the planning

and design concepts which are advocated here for the CBD can
also be applied at, perhpas, a reduced scale to any other high
density development in the city, particularly in the secondary
activity centers advocated for the multi-nucleated city of the
future.

Okamota, Rai, "Urban Design Determinants in Seattle and New York,"
Journal 23 the Franklin Institpte, v. 28, no. 5, p. h01,
November 1968.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY -- TEXTS

1.)
2.)

3.)

h.)

5.)

16.)
17.)
18.)

19.)

20.)

American Institute of Architects, Energy and the Built Environ-
ment, monograph, 1975.

Brinkworth, Brian J., Sola Energy for Man, boston: Houghton-
Mifflin Co., 1972.

Burco, Robert A. Future Urban Transportation Systems: Impacts gp_
Urban Life and Form, Washignton: Urban Transportation Administration,

1968.

Cohen, Allen 8., Residential Fuel Policy and the Environment, New
Brunswick, N.J., Rutgers Press, 1975.

 

Dahinder, James, Urban Structure of the Future, New York:
Harcourt, Brace, and Company, 1972.

) Dantzig, George B., Compact city, New York: The Viking Press, 1973.

Doxiadis, Constantine A., Energence and Growth of an Urban REgion,
v. 3, Detroit: The Detroit Edison Co., 1970.

Ford Foundation, A Time pp_Choose: America's Energy Future, 197D.

Freeman, David 3., Energy: The New Era, New York: Doubleday Press,

l97h.

Gruen, Victor, Centers for the Urban Environment , New York:
W.W. Norton Co., 1973.

Gruen, Victor, The Heart of Our Cities, New York: Macmillan, 196A.

Halacy, Daniel S., The Coming_Era 22 Solar Energy, New York: Simon
and Shuster, 1973.

Heeter, David, Toward 2_More Effective Lapd_Use Guidance System, 1969.
Jackson, John N., The Urban Future, Oxford University Press, 1972.

 

Knowles, Ralph L., Energy“ and Form: An Ecological Approach to
Urban Form, 1969.

Lewis, David, The Pedestrian in the City, New York: Little, Brown
Co. , 1966.

Miller, Grian, Innovation ip_New Communities, New York: Harcourt,
Brace, JOvanovich, 1972.

Mitre Corp., UrbanTransportation :Assessipg Needs for the Futuze,
Washington: U.S. Technical Information Service, 1973.

 

National Research Council, Long-Range Planning for Urban Research
and Development, 1969.

Plowden, Stephan, Towns Against Traffic,0xford University Press,
1972.

21.)

22.)

26.)

27.)
28.)
29.)

30.)

Real Estate Research Corporation, The CLst of Sprawl, Washington:
U. S. Governemtn Printing Office, 19 WK

Rickles, Robert N. Energy in_the City.Environment, New York:
Viking Press, 1973.

Spreiregen, Paul D., Urban Design: The Architecture Lf Towns and
Cities, 1965.

 

Rudofsky, Bernard, Streets for People, New York: Random House, 1969.
Stanford Research Institute, Future Urban Transportation Systems:

Citizens Guide £2_Urban_Growth_, 1973.

 

Wheeler, James 0., The Urban Circulation Noose,New York: Vantage
Press, 197A.

Williams, James R., Solar Energy: Technology and Applications, New
York: Fawcett Press, 197H.

Wingo, Lowden, Cities and Space, New York: Bobbs-Merril Press,
1966.

Wolf, Peter, The Future Lf the City, New York: Whitney Library of
Design, 197h.

PERIODICALS AND NEWSPAPERS

Morrison, David L., "Enrgy in the Urban Environment," American
Institute Lf Aeronautics, Paper # 71-526, 1971.

American Institute of Architects Journal, "Urban Design" (entire
issue), v. 35, no. 3, March 1961.

Architectural Forum, "Architecture and Energy," 139: 38-57,
July 1973.

h.) Architectural Forum, "Uncontrolled Growth has Become an Inter—

wnational Concern," 138:62, April 1973.

Architectural Record, "Future of the City," 157:h5+, February 1975.

Architectural Record, "Some Thoughts on Open Space, Environment,
and Energy," May 1972.

Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, "Energy Joyride is Over," 29:39,
Ocotber 1973.

Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, "Transportation Energy Use and
Conservation Potential, 31,32, December 1973.

Business Week, "Three Scenarios for a U.S. Energy Policy," p. 9b,
October 26, l97h.

Commonweal, "Energy: End of an Era," 99: 527-530, March 1, 197A.

Downs, Anthony, "The Future is Demographic Change," Future Land
Use, Robert W. Burchell (ed.), New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers
Press, 1975.

Grinsted, Robert R., "Bottlenecks." Environment, lh:3, April'l972.
Stein, Richard, "A Matter of Design," Environment, lh:8, October 1972.
Environment,"Solar Energy," 15: 16-20, June, 1973.

 

 

Green, Farno L., "Energy Potential from Agricultural Field Residues,"
Michigan Free Press, September 1, 1975, p. 2.

Futures, "Urban Transportation and City Form," 3: 239-251, June l97h.

Howath, Ronald J., "Machine Space," Geographical Review, 63: 131,
April 197h.

Goldberg, Michael A., "The Economics of Limiting Energy Use,"
Alternatives, p. 3-13, Summer 1972.

Intellect, "New Energy Sources Ten Years Away," 103: 211—212,

January 1975.
Intellect, "Transportation and American Cities," 103: 75-76,

November 197h.

Journal of the American Institute of Planners, "Urban Design as

a Force in Comprehensive Planning, 29: 2-8, February 1963.

Journal of Housing, "The Planner' 5 Role in Gringing Better Urban

Design into City Rebuilding," 19:7: 371-37h, September 1962.
Journal of Housing, "Urban Design" (entire issue), 19:7,

September "1973.

The Mother_Earth News, "The Answer is Blowin' in the Wind," 2h:
67—75 , 17 ,60—6117

Natin's Business, "Energy Sources of Tomorrow," 62:20-22,
February 197 .

Newsweek, "Energy Supply," 82:71-72, July 1,1973.

New York Times Magazine, "Squeezing Spread City," p. 38-h0,
March 17, 197k.

Okamota, Rai, "Urban Design Determinants in Seattle and New
York," Journal 2£.the_Franklin Institute, 286:5:h01, November 1968.

Public Interest, "Is There An Energy Crisis?," Spring 1973.
Public Interest, "Notes on the Post-Industrial Society," Winter

1967.

31.)
32.)
33.)
3h.)
35.)
36.)

37.)

38.)

Quarterly Review'gg Economcs, "Residential Demands for Energy,"
Spring 1971.

Science, "Efficiency of Energy Use in the U.S.," p. 33, March

1973.

Science, "Energy Options: Challenge for the Future," p. 9,

September 1972. ”' _ .1
' -. 5.2;,
Science, "Fusion Reactors as Future Energy Sources," p.flg97-h07,

November 197%.

up,“ _~
Science and Public Affaris, "Nuclear Reactor Safety," 30§gll2,
October 197".

0
Scientific American, "Energy Resources of the Earth," September

1971 O

Steinlieb, George, "The Future is a Different United States,"
Future Land Use, Robert W. Burchell (ed.) New Brunswick, N.J.:
Rutgers Press, 1975.

U.S. News, "Buildings of the Future Will Save Fuel," 76: h7-h8,

February 18, 197".

._)“::‘é‘ll“ - 9

   

' E». I‘...“ ”'V'h""" ecocn o.- .. no,
r

,4," v- 5

f ' IllllllllllHHIIHIIHHIINIllHIIHllllllllllllllIllllllHll

31293 02656 9669

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o
u
.
o
c
.
‘ .
e
s
' .
. .
n
. . . I
o .
.
. . . . .
.
e _ . I
. . . I
. _ ‘ n
- a .
. . I
o u
I ‘ ‘ . .
.
- I I
‘ . u .
‘ .
7 .
o . _ . . . I I I
. . . . .
o ‘ - ' . - . .
. ' - u . . .
. . . . . . I I
n
‘ . ' o . . I
. . .
. _ . . .
. . o ' . . . . . . . I
I - n . , .
v . I
. _- . , I
I o
I . ' .‘ ’ .’ - . .
' o o . .
_ . I I I I
. h ' . ' ' - . u . .
. - . - , . . .
. D ‘ n . . . I
. . ' ‘ . I
. . . . ', - . . . .
. . . . . . .' I I
o I ‘,
i ‘ . n .
. . . , I
. . I . I
‘ ' c \ . . .
. . . I I I
. . I I I I
' .' . . . I
. . . . . . , . .' . . I I
» - n . . . . .
‘ o . . .
. ' . . . _ . ,
- - . ‘ . _ . .
u . _ I I I .
' . . I
. . ‘ . . , .
I ‘ . " ' ' ' . . _
. . . . . , I I . I
u . . _ . . . I
. . _ . _ I
. ‘ - . . _.
a I I
. . h ' . . I . I
I ' ‘ . . , .
7 O - v . .
.. . . . . I . I
. . o . . I I
. _ _ . I I I
. . . . . . . . I I I
‘ o ‘ ' . . e
I ' ‘ ‘ 0 . . . _ . I
. . . . I I
. . . . 1 . . . . . I I I
‘ . . . , . .
I . I - ' ‘ ' . . . , e .
. - . . - - . . . e .
. . . . I . I I I
I . V ' ' ‘ - ‘ . . . I .
. . . e . . O . . _
l l ‘ - u
. I V . ' ' ~ . .
. - . . . .. . . . . .
' - I V - . - . ' '.‘ ' .
. . . I . _
‘ ‘ ‘ . . - I
. . _ . I I
' 'n - , . _ _ . . I
. I . . I
. ~ _ . . . _ . . I o . . I II I
. . . _ . .. . , I I I
. . . _ . I I I
. , - . . . I I . , I I
. . . . . ._ . . . .' I . I I I
. . . x - . . . . . , I I
. o v y . . I I I I I I
. . . ‘ . . . , I
. . . _ I . I
. , e . . . . . . I
a . . . . . . . . I I . . _
. > .‘ .“ '. I .a . . I I I I I
7 I ‘ ' -. . . I ‘ ' . . . . .
’ I 7 . ' '. ' . . .
_ v. . . . . I I I
‘ ‘ . I . ' ' ' i . . . .
- - . . . . I .
7 ‘ I ' ~ . 7 I ~ ' .. . o .
I ', . . ' . - . . _ _ . . . . _ _ I I
. . . . ' . . I . . I I I
' ‘ ~ . . V . _
, ~ - '. _ . . I I I
. . ._ .- - u . . . . I I I
. - .' I . . I I I I
'. ' ' . I I I
- . - . . . .
'. . . . ' “ ‘ u .
' ' ' .’. , - . . ‘I
. . _ . . '. . . . _ . .
- . . , . _ I
. -. . . . s . . , I . I
. . . - . _ . I . . . . I I, _
1. . . —. . . . . , . I I
. ‘ c . . . . . . .* . . _ I I
.. I . . . . . _ . . . . I
‘ ' . . I
- - .. .. . . I I
o - . , . . . I I I
e ' ' - - . . a . . I I
. . . _ I I . I
. o . ~ . . - . . . . , . . . . .
. . . . . I I I I
. . .'. - _ u . . . I . . I . I I I
. 7 . .I i U ' ' - ' ' ' . . . _' - - '. - a . . .
I. I I . ‘ . ' ' ' ' - . . u . ,
. ’.' - '. ‘ . . c. . .
e e . - . . s . I I I I I
. .I: ‘ o . .' . “.‘ I _ . . . . . II I I I . I
. _ . - . ._ . . . . I I
' 1 -. . I I I
- . . . I I
' . '_' v a I . o . . . _ ,
. l . ‘ . ~ . . . ' ' . .
. e . . . . . , . - . .. . . . . ,
e . .. . e I . - . I I I
. . . . . ‘ . _ _ . . . I I
'7‘ I 3 ‘ 'I . ' -' ‘ . - . . . - .
’ ’ ' . . . I I
e . 0 ~ I . . . I I I I I
7 . -.‘ ~ . ' " . .'. ‘ . . v .- . . ‘ .
, .~ . . I I .' I _ I I
~ . . . . I I I I
. . . - , . . . . I I
. , . . . . , . . I I I I
.- h V . 7. . . ' - h ' . . . . . . .
~ . . . . . . . _ _ . . I
-V, ‘ 3 u - ~ ~ .
‘ - I ~ ~ . . . . . 'I _ . I I . I _ I I
. ' - . . 7 ' ‘ . . .
.‘ u . . . I . . I
. . . ~. g a - . , . . I I I
. - ‘ ' ' ‘ . . . . . I
' ' ‘ ' u. . . I
a - _ . ‘ . , . . I . . _ I
. . .s. \ q . I . I I I I
' i ‘ 7 . 7 . 7 . . ‘ ‘ . \ - . .
_ . . . , I I I I
Io. . . ,7. . . . . . \ .
.l ..‘ V. ' ‘ ' . "- . . ' . _ . ~ . .
~ . . -- .. ‘ -. . . I
.1 . . . . . . , I
' ' ‘ \ . . . . . .
. n c 4 _ I I I I I
u - . . . '. . I I
. . . u . . ~ . . . I I I
. . - . u . . u . I . _ I I
. o ' 1 , . , . . . I I I
" ‘ ' . . . _ I
7 . . . ' . ~l.‘_ "‘ ‘ . . . .'. . . .. . . v
o ' : s . < . ~ . . . , ‘ . I .
. . . I , . I I ‘ I I
v . . - I .4 I I I
.. . _ . . . I _ I
1 . , ~> . . I. k . I I I
‘ -' ‘ . 7 7 ' ' . . . A
z. .. I. .-». - . . ‘. I . .. I .' I I I I _ I I
. . ... .. .- . . . I V. .
' ‘I H -' " ’ ' e . 'e . ‘ \ I . . -
- -. ‘. p . . e . . . . . I I . . . I
. ~ ~ '. . - - . . .
u . . . . . . . n . _ . I
‘ ‘ ’ ‘ . ' ~ . . ..
... ’. . .' . . . I I I
. ‘ .. _ ,g . ‘ ,I ' . - - v I - . . . . .
. k .‘ . . . Q . . . I I I
. - | I . . - ~. . - . ‘ . I _. ' II
\ . , . - . . . . . _ II
. ‘ . -I _ , . . . I I
- ‘ . I - . .' . .._ I . , I
. ~ -g' - \ . . I . . . I I I II
. ‘. ‘7 7 -' ‘ ' . . - ' - .
u _u.. -’ .O _ , . _.I . . . ‘ I I
' ' ' - 7 . . ‘ ' .3 .. ‘ . ' . ‘ 0
~ ~ _ , I I
.‘. .~ . ._ -, . . '. ‘ I I
y. - . . . .I I I I
. . III. a . . I I I . .
. . 7‘ ‘ h" .' - ‘ . .
v _ . .