Smart Communities

Sustainable Agriculture: Taking a Leaf Out of Cuba’s Book

Cuba is probably not a country you tend to think of when you hear the words ‘role model.’  But when it comes to urban agriculture, we have something to learn from them.  In the early 1990s, Cuba was experiencing a food shortage crisis.  After the Soviet Bloc collapsed in 1989, Cuba lost the food and chemical imports it so heavily depended on from them.  The tightening of the US embargo made the food security situation even worse.  With the worsening conditions, residents of Havana took it upon themselves to begin planting food crops on porches, balconies, backyards, and abandoned city lots. Both the Cuban Ministry of Agriculture and Havana’s city government supported this movement, and decided to form the Department of Urban Agriculture in 1994.  Initially used to secure land use rights and provide free land for those who wanted to grow food in the city, the department now offers organic agriculture knowledge and advice to the urban gardeners, while also playing a role in the start-up and functioning of various popular gardens.  In addition to the Department of Agriculture, gardeners also get support from each other, in the form of horticulture clubs that pool resources and experience, and from both national and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

 Havana’s urban agriculture ranges from private gardens to state-owned research gardens, with their popular gardens being the most widespread and accessible. A wide selection of produce is cultivated, depending on family needs, market availability, and suitability with the soil and locality.  Because gardeners apply the principles of organic agriculture (i.e., low cost, readily available, environmentally sustainable), they have achieved garden productivity with minimal inputs.  They rely on organic fertilizers rather than chemical fertilizers, control weeds by hand weeding, and often maximize the use of land by cultivating crops that produce in the ground, on the ground, and above the ground.

Many people thought that the commitment to urban agriculture would not last once the food shortage had been alleviated.  But, though the food shortages have decreased considerably since the mid 1990s, Cubans have become increasingly more involved in urban agriculture.  Havana’s farms and gardens have been increasing in size, number, and in quality.  Yield and production levels have gone up. Today more than half of Havana’s fresh produce is grown within the city limits. The gardens have had a significant impact on the food security of the city and in improving the Cuban diet.  They have also helped to empower individuals and communities within Havana, build community pride, and renew solidarity during a time of crisis.  

 So what can we take from this?  Urban agriculture in Cuba may have come about as a response to a food shortage crisis but the benefits have been far reaching.  If cities in the U.S. were to follow their example (and some have), it is likely that they would see similar benefits.  Right now in the U.S. more food is being shipped in from outside markets than at any other point in history, and a higher percentage of Americans are living in cities than ever before.  This leads to a wide array of social, environmental, economic, and public health costs, ranging from air pollution to the food insecurity often experienced by the working poor.  Sustainable urban agriculture addresses a city’s problems in innovative ways.  Purchasing food that is locally grown decreases energy needs and costs associated with long distance travel and refrigeration.  Individual health improves when city residents have access to and greater control over their own food system.  There are environmental benefits, including cleaner air, lower summer temperatures, and recycled wastewater and trash.  Economic development and community revitalization are actualized when neighborhoods take pride in a community garden, when inner-city residents have the ability to grow and market their own food, and when inner-city farmers’ markets provide new opportunities for entrepreneurs and commercial farmers.  Perhaps most importantly, urban agriculture can be used as a way for the food insecure to gain access to fresh, affordable, nutritious food.

Clearly, there are a lot of benefits to be gained by implementing urban agriculture. Hopefully cities will begin looking to Cuba as inspiration to develop an urban agriculture infrastructure that will improve food security, increase economic development, and help our communities on their way to becoming more sustainable.

 Guest Contributor: Ariel Ardura

 

 

Our State of Protest

In the weeks leading up to this blog entry, I had planned on writing about something I was comfortable with—land use, alternative transportation, transit-oriented development, and the like.  But as I sit here in the Dome Room of the Rotunda on this unusually warm February afternoon, I cannot help but be distracted by the crowd forming outside.  Their chants echo across the terrace and into our little Pantheon. “What do we want?” “A Living Wage!”  “When do we want it?” “Now."

The Living Wage Campaign at the University of Virginia has been making headlines for some time now, but an ongoing hunger strike and increased visibility around Charlottesville has brought it to the forefront of not just local, but regional issues.  Just an hour to our east, silent protests in Richmond over the state’s anti-abortion legislation have made national headlines as the issue of women’s health steps into the political spotlight.

Virginia, for the time being, is a protest state. I wonder how Mr. Jefferson, the University’s founder might have thought about this. We get a glimpse in a letter he wrote to James Madison, January 30, 1787, in which he said, “A little rebellion now and then is a good thing and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.”

The Atlantic Cities recently featured an interesting article on the issue of protests in American communities.  The author, Emily Badger, questions why these and other protests have not escalated to violent riots in recent years.  When one considers the disastrous effects of the recent recession, the question becomes even harder to answer.  She looks to University of Pennsylvania historian Michael Katz’s new book on urban violence for his opinion on the subject.  Very generally, one of Katz’s arguments is that the masses have become complacent in the new “consumer republic.”  He notes, “It's good that we don't have mass civil violence, for sure.  But the question is: Why don't we have more political mobilization?”

 As I sit here in the Rotunda, constantly distracted by tourists, prospective students, but most notably the Living Wage Campaign, I have to disagree with Mr. Katz.  The political mobilization is present here in Virginia, and with the Tea Party and Occupy movement, political mobilization is present across the country.

Indeed, we do not have the mass civil violence of decades past.  With few exceptions, my generation has not experienced urban violence comparable to that seen at the height of racial turmoil in the 1960s.  But that does not mean progress is not being made now; the importance of nonviolent protests and organizing through social media cannot be downplayed when discussing contemporary social and economic unrest.

The relative lack of violent protests and urban riots is, in my opinion, something to be celebrated in America.  We must feel safe in our community and comfortable in contributing and critiquing opinions.  Change in our communities is healthy and happening, and nonviolent protests like the Living Wage Campaign should not only be expected, but also welcomed with open arms. 

Ryan Yowell, Guest Contributor

Shopping Centers: Generic, Sprawling, and Becoming Obsolete?

Think back to your hometown’s historic district.  You might not have lived there, but you might have visited the post office or antique shop.  What types of buildings did it have?  Odds are they were the styles now romanticized in the concept of Main Street America:  two or three stories tall, with tall windows and recessed entryways, perhaps a wide sidewalk or American flag out front.  They had their similarities, sure, but they were all unique in their own way.  This architecture once populated cities and towns across America.

Now consider where you actually grew up, outside those historic districts, and where you probably live now.  Do those types of buildings exist today?  Of course not.  Instead of distinctive buildings that still lend special sense of place and funky feel to old towns today, today we have shopping centers and strip malls.  One of the most obvious products of the suburban sprawl that has dominated American development since the 1950s has been the generic buildings that now populate the outer fringes of communities from Los Angeles to Dillwyn, Va. 

Much of this growth has been driven by the explosion of the automobile.  Instead of being built to a pedestrian scale, much of the suburbs are now built for the car.  On a vibrant city sidewalk, you might be four or five people across walking; on a busy road, you often are four or five cars across.  The pattern of wide roads and high speeds has maintained this scale but with consequences not only for pedestrians and architectural variety, but also for the economy.

Christopher Leinberger at the University of Michigan has written about how our current stock of building types influenced the rise of the recent recession.  As a result of massive increases in home value and demand created by the housing boom, developers built speculation housing across the country and commercial developments to serve them.  Many of these developments were built as cheaply as possible, with an eye toward best serving the public driving on nearby roads.  The recession has decimated the value and attractiveness of these commercial developments.  Leinberger attributes this trend to the growing appeal urban and/or mixed-use areas have, often at suburbia’s expense.  We simply overbuilt our demand.

How can we remedy this situation?  How can we get to a point where we’re not as reliant on the shopping center?  One solution is by building taller.  This has happened thanks to the invisible hand of the free market in places like Tyson’s Corner outside Washington or the Perimeter area outside Atlanta.  A concerted effort by officials and developers across the country, however, especially in urban and suburban areas, can help bring denser environments that not only are more distinctive but also encourage more demand and use of transit services.  These forms of transportation can help clean our air and lessen auto congestion.  In small towns, we can encourage those businesses to move into historic areas and help breathe lives into the declining centers of towns.

Given the current economic climate, we have the opportunity to change the ways we focus our land use patterns.  We can start changing the conversation and focus on development town centers and other nodes that actively serve pedestrians and bikers in addition to drivers, places that focus on streets and buildings and not parking lots.  With the right steps, we can help make the suburban shopping center as obsolete as 1970s skyscrapers look today.

Guest Contributor: Will Feeney

 

 

 

Hosting the Super Bowl: Credit or Debit?

This past weekend I had the opportunity to travel to Indianapolis, Indiana, which recently put its name on the map as the host of the 2012 NFL Super Bowl. While walking through Downtown Indy, I gazed at the leftover signs and decorations outside of residences and storefronts, and wondered what a city would need to do to accommodate around 150,000 visitors. During my trip there, everyone coined Indy as an “underrated city.” Therefore, it was crucial for Indy to create a pleasant experience for its tourists that would make this Mid-Western city globally competitive.

Indianapolis prepared in several ways. First, the City constructed a new airport terminal in 2008 that was built about 16 miles away from Downtown. The new terminal was sited in a more efficient location than the old, allowing for more airlines and connections to be made at Indianapolis International. Built with energy efficiency in mind, in November of 2011 it also became the nation’s first LEED certified airport.

Next, Indy accommodated visitors by creating a compact Downtown and allocating it as the center of the Super Bowl. In 2008 the Lucas Oil Stadium was built about six blocks away from the Soldier’s and Saint’s Monument, the symbolic center of the City, giving it a “very walkable” Walk Score of 72. It was purposefully built to be within walking distance of Indy’s hotels, restaurants, and cultural district. While one would think that a stadium built right near the center of the Downtown would be distracting, the Lucas Oil Stadium fits surprisingly well with the fabric. This is mainly due to its brick design in that it looks more like a large building than a stadium. Additionally, creating a walkable Downtown was the formation of the Indianapolis Cultural Trail, an urban bike and pedestrian path connecting the five downtown cultural districts. Indianapolis’s walkable Downtown urged Forbes to coin Indianapolis as the Super Bowl XLVI's “Real Winner."

While many Downtown businesses reaped the benefits of the Super Bowl crowd, businesses in outlying districts, such as Broad Ripple and Fountain Square, suffered as tourists and visitors concentrated Downtown. Additionally, the City faced many costs to hold the Super Bowl. In the planning phases, the City estimated that it would spend anywhere from  $7.8 million to $8.2 million on Super Bowl expenses such as police overtime, trash pickup, new signs, safety vehicles and supplies, and temporary permits. Many experts say that many of the benefits of the Super Bowl may only be short-term. Additionally, while the Super Bowl allowed Indy to re-think its Downtown and walkability, there are still many problems it faces in connecting the rest of the city. Primarily, the City lacks a reliable mass transit system and during my stay there not once did we use public transportation.   The infrastructures in the East and West neighborhoods are dilapidated and the public education system has countless failing schools. While large events like the Super Bowl bring in revenue, tourism, a walkable Downtown and attention to the city, the question is, is it enough to solve the city’s larger problems that prevent it from becoming globally competitive? 

Guest Contributor: Natalie Eller

 

Sustainable Transportation Includes Buses and Slow Trains

When I traveled to Europe this summer, I felt in love with multimodal and sustainable transportation. Bikes, mopeds, trams, trolleys, trains are just a few to name. When we’re looking today about how to judge a community’s vitality, one cannot help but look at how the transportation system property serves all members of the community.

Not only does effective public transport allow citizens to get to work on time, but in 2009, public transportation managed to create double the number of jobs that highway investments did. This is an impressive number. If communities are benefitting both from the mobility that public transportation provides and from its job creation externalities, then investment in public transportation should be a high priority for policy makers to build better communities.

It seems the American public is starting to agree. More Americans are now carpooling to work and using public transit (where it exists) for 34% and 29% of the time, respectively. Even with this good “movement” in the numbers, we have to think very carefully about how we strategically invest in public transportation and new infrastructure. Investing in trendy transportation initiatives prematurely could end up isolating lower income citizens, with high admission fees and a lack of investments in established systems like buses.

For example, high speed rail projects are huge investments. When we aren’t careful about how we plan for the route connections, the capabilities of the high speed rail (HSR) system aren’t taken to full advantage. Look at ACELA, the Northeast’s pride HSR project. It has reached 150 mph, but rarely ever is able to reach such speeds because of repetitive stops. I think it’s more important to think about how many people Acela can serve than how fast it can go on a single trip. Instead of trying to race with Asia or Europe to see who has the fastest HSR train, let’s look better at how effectively the system serves the demographics we are looking to serve. Then can you say that the project was a strong investment.

Another example is the Tampa-to-Orlando Project, which seems comical that is even exists. The two cities as Megan McArdle, author of the article, points out are only 84 miles apart! Instead of using Federal grant money to make a high speed bullet train route, work with Amtrak to make more efficient and reliable commuter trains with more frequent travel times. This uses the same infrastructure and rail lines, without the enormous construction investments that a superfluous HSR system would need. Looking further, if you want to create a more sustainable rail system, look in clean energy powered trains to start off. If that works, policy makers can begin to allocate funds to localities that already have existing, and efficient, systems of passenger rail as experiments for HSR investment.

I am a fan of high speed rail. However before we fully take the leap into investment in projects that may be an overinvestment or an underuse, we need to work with what we have first. Expanding passenger rail services, improving bus route linkages to train stations, and rethinking clean energy for trains are just a few examples of positive changes we can make now with lower levels of investment. One has to only look at the success of the bus system in Curitiba, Brazil, to know that we have work to do here. By doing so, we can allow help all citizens, especially those in the lower income bracket, to travel and get to work. Only once our communities have effective “regular” speed transportation, can we think about bigger and faster trains.

Guest Contributor: Kelly Clifton

 

A Homeless-free America is More Than Homes

The homeless population of America today has been most evident in large urban centers of the country, most notably visible in areas in and around Los Angeles and New York City. Public concern for the homeless increased in the late 1960s after the Vietnam War, when a specific lawsuit out of New York City was filed in an attempt to secure “shelter space” for every homeless man (women were included later). The homeless plaintiffs eventually won the lawsuit, but then issues regarding the definition and characterization of homelessness and housing status arose from the ashes of legal battles. Classification and legal aside, the solution to housing our homeless has little to do with availability of homes.

In regard to the definition of homelessness, one camp suggested that it should include people in unstable housing situations in addition to those that literally have no overnight shelter. In the 1970s and early 1980s, concerns were raised about the status of veterans of the Vietnam War who were now looking to find their place in society. It became hard to ignore related issues of disability and unemployment as the issue broadened to include more of the general population. The unemployment rate rose to 10.8 percent in December 1982. Many housing program advocates began to push for a broader definition of homelessness after citing the obvious connection between recent economic trends and housing stability of even working Americans, much less those Americans that were out of work for reasons beyond their control.

The other camp, particularly those associated directly with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), argued that it was more important to specifically define “housing status” of a given individual or family so that action and policy designed to alleviate homelessness could be more pointed and focused. The plague of homelessness does not exist in a vacuum, but rather is circumstantial and due to factors that extend beyond a person’s ability to find a physical place to dwell. It is almost as if HUD would be better served by focusing on urban development more so than housing. Lack of housing and its associated effects tend to be on the tail end of a series of factors that lead one along the line of societal downgrade and economic depression, which would lead one to believe that the two camps are too narrowly focused.

FDR’s New Deal included a plethora of government assistance programs (for example, the US Housing Authority, among others) to help Americans get back on their feet in response to the Great Depression. Historians refer to the 3 R’s (relief, recovery, and reform) as a summary of the New Deal agenda and policy goals. With this program, homelessness and poverty were addressed with comprehensive government action that extended beyond immediate quick fixes and temporary relief. LBJ’s Great Society was a closely related program that extended government arms to address poverty and associated racial and social injustices. Comprehensive individual, community, and national development programs all require a wrap-around approach that encompasses all potential areas of growth and maturation. In a sense, the Great Society was aimed at this goal.

During the Reagan Administration the number of homeless Americans increased in large part because of the reduction in the number of people eligible to receive federal disability payments. However, the first major and direct response to the homelessness crisis came during President Reagan’s second term, when the McKinney Homeless Assistance Act was signed in 1987. This measure authorized programs in shelters to include medical services, employment search services, and job skills training. There was even some communication and cross-collaboration between the Department of Education and HUD to provide services for children and school-aged youth. However, it was not until 2003 that the Social Security Administration got into the act by starting programs to help the chronically homeless (only one definition of homeless) apply for federal disability payments in an attempt to indirectly alleviate homelessness.

In the early 1990s, there was a consensus reached that the root cause of non-chronic homelessness (yet another definition of homelessness) was an insufficient amount of affordable housing for families. However, housing availability is only a side effect to the larger disease of lack of viable economic opportunity, mobility, and education, sometimes even in the wake of additional mental health issues. We have seen through previous Administrations that government agency and departmental collaborations have been successful in addressing homelessness. Many players in the game included entities external to HUD and various public housing authorities. The way to address homelessness is to create programs that support overall human well being, touching on social, environmental, and educational factors. Otherwise we are just fumbling around with definitions of people that we are trying to place in housing rather than giving people the means and motivation to live in housing. A good place for communities to begin the process is by taking a look at the National Alliance to Prevent Homelessness Ten Essentials for communities. It is roadmap to begin the journey of ending homelessness in every community.

Imran Khan,Guest Contributor

Imran occasionally blogs at iuk0162.wordpress.com.

 

 

Redefining Education for the 21st Century: Going Beyond Standardized Tests

Yes, the American government’s efforts to raise our children’s reading and math levels are valid.  Without a solid understanding of these elementary skills, a child will most likely be unable to progress to higher education.  But how will he/she fare in the longer run?  By obsessing over standardized test scores, we may be putting blinders on our children, denying them the stimulants that ignite their curiosity.  A country--in or out of a recession--thrives on creativity.  New ideas formulate new jobs and new industries, ensuring that our country not only stays afloat but enabling us to make discoveries.  If we restrain our children’s academic focus, we subsequently are limiting the growth and prosperity of our country’s future. 

In trying to figure out what should define American education, let’s take a look at our options:

Data

Since the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, the U.S. government has focused on yearly statistics to determine the success of children’s education.  Government officials have set a goal for every American student to reach grade level reading and math scores by 2014.  But as of December 2011, half of the country’s schools failed to reach these standards.  Even if it is possible to eventually reach this quantitative standard, it may not be a good use of our time.  Many states have already concluded that the NCLB does not match their educational aims, and they in turn are pursuing waivers to the act.

Intellectual Curiosity

In addition to the recession, the government’s fixation with reading and math scores has stripped art, music, and other specialized departments from our nation’s schools.   By replacing cultural and recreational activities with a focus on basic skills, are we actually doing the children a favor?  Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan argues, “when you eliminate extra curriculars and art and P.E. and music, you absolutely hurt your children and ultimately you hurt your state.”  We need to integrate the importance of raw curiosity into the curriculum.   Motivating a child to pursue his/her interests is far more beneficial than forcing skill sets on unwilling students.  We nourish our youth’s enthusiasm for it will spawn far greater results than those measured by test scores.

Awareness of Surroundings

“Don’t ever let school get in the way of education” said one mother to another.  It was a crisp winter day and snow had blanketed the town overnight.  The first mother had dressed her children in snow gear and was excited to share her passion for the outdoors with her children.  On the contrary, the second mother feared missing a day of reading and math classes was one day too many.  But when comparing the sublime, snowy mountainside to arithmetic exercises, which will inspire a child more?

By simply observing her surroundings, one student at the Royal College of Art imagined a way to improve the world around her.  Ariane Prin witnessed loads of waste exiting RCA’s art rooms and cafeterias every day. “I believe design is about exploring the social and natural opportunities around us, taking advantage of every situation by connecting human activities with environmental principles.”  With such an optimistic mindset, Prin soon invented a way to break down these scraps of clay and flour and recycle them into tools used by every student both today and in the future: pencils.  Let us look to this innovative artist for inspiration.

As some voices in the United States have already expressed, it is pertinent that we re-assess our definition and approach to education.  We must get our hands off of the calculators and our heads out of the computer data. After all, it was Albert Einstein who said, “Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted.”   Instead, we need to breathe in our surroundings and listen to our instinctive yearnings.  By fostering our children’s fervor, they will learn to direct their own education and, finally, our future.

Guest Contributor: Burgess Rice

Put it on Wheels: Service Delivery the Old Fashioned Way

Entrepreneurial businesses and non-profit organizations are addressing the gap in service delivery in low-income urban areas through the innovative use of mobile infrastructure.  The challenges presented by the long-term disinvestment in urban areas include a lack of access to healthy, affordable foods, health care services, and other resources that higher-income areas take for granted.  Establishing new, permanent health care facilities, full-service grocery stores, and farmers market requires large capital investments, time, and commitment.  By putting these services on wheels, organizations across the country are providing an intermediate step to reinvestment in urban communities.

Health care providers from Boston to New Orleans are providing a range of health care services through mobile delivery, including education; prevention services; and testing for hypertension, glaucoma, pregnancy, cholesterol, and HIV/AIDS.  Serving primarily the uninsured in Washington DC, the Washington on Wheels Mobile Health Clinic is staffed by a doctor and a nurse practitioner who conduct regularly-scheduled visits to set locations around the District.  Boston’s Family Van helped 2,322 patients identify previously undiagnosed conditions in 2010 and has assisted 50 percent of its regular clients to control their chronic conditions.  To learn more about mobile health project across the country, www.mobilehealthmap.org provides information on over 450 projects as well as links to additional resources and data.

Mobile delivery opportunities extend beyond health care to the local food movement.  In upstate New York, the Capital District Community Gardens’ Veggie Mobile (shown in "hyperdrive" in the video to the right) has operated since 2007 as a “produce-market-on-wheels that sells wholesale fruits and vegetables to low-income communities and independent senior living communities.”  Operating out of a converted delivery truck topped with solar panels, this mobile service works with local farmers to provide access to seasonal produce at an affordable rate.  Other mobile food truck projects include Farm to Family and the Real Food Farm’s Mobile Farmers Market.

In a recent interview with On Being’s Krista Tippet, international conflict mediator John Paul Lederach shared a haiku inspired by his work in Nepal:

Don’t ask the mountain
to move. Just bring a pebble
Each time you visit.

This eloquent idea can help urban planners frame innovative concepts for improving the range of services available in urban areas: mobile service delivery offers an opportunity to prove demand for and viability of services, opening the door to opportunities for future community investment in permanent bricks and mortar institutions.

Guest Contributor: Kate Bird

 

Growing in Place: Housing Design that Adapts to All Phases of Life

In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in the concept of “aging in place.” Aging in place embodies the idea that a majority of seniors wish to remain in their homes as they age, rather than relocating to nursing homes or other senior care facilities. Thus, there has been a trend toward incorporating senior-friendly elements (i.e. master bedrooms on the first floor, wider doorways and walkways for wheelchair accessibility, intercom systems, etc.) into housing design to better accommodate independent living. There has also been a shift toward the development of intergenerational housing complexes in which seniors, students, and young families interact and share common areas in apartment style buildings. Intergenerational housing allows seniors to maintain independent living without being distanced from younger generations.

 While aging in place and intergenerational housing complexes are certainly innovative practices, I believe that they are reactive, rather than proactive measures. Why wait until our loved ones have aged, when we can solve the problem while they are still young? According to 1992 U.S. Census data, it was calculated that the average American moves a total of 11.7 times during the course of his or her lifetime. While this high rate of mobility is most typically attributed to military reassignment, job relocation, and the instability of the housing market, the reason for moving is usually much simpler. Quite often, people move because the two-bedroom apartment that was perfect for a college bachelor is no longer suitable for an active family of four. Similarly, the six-bedroom estate that was a memorable summer retreat is no longer feasible for the elderly couple that struggles with its upkeep.

Thus, the true solution is not aging in place, but rather “growing in place.”  By designing homes that can adapt to individuals in all phases of life, we can avoid the need to retrofit houses later in life as family dynamics change.

 Some tips for growing in place are as follows:

 

• When looking at a house, try to see yourself through the eyes of family members and guests. Will your children’s bedrooms be able to fit a full/queen-size bed as they mature or will they be stuck with a twin-size bed? Will the in-laws have to sit on the couch at Thanksgiving or will there be enough room for a large dining room table? When guests have to use the powder room, will you hear the toilet flushing in the kitchen? Do you have suitable outdoor space for entertaining and recreation? Is there a proper division of space -- can your husband watch the football game without disturbing you while you update files for work?
• Do not buy a house with the idea that you will move in a year or two; your financial situation may change at any point. Plan ahead for the future and buy a house that has slightly more room than you currently need, but is still within your budget. If you know for certain that you will only be in a location temporarily, consider renting.
• If you are considering starting a family or have young children, avoid floor plans with sharp angles, steep stairs, and traditional wooden guardrails overlooking lower levels. Instead, look for more open floor plans that maximize visibility and encourage family interaction.
• Avoid storage in high places. While ceiling-height cabinetry is attractive, stepstools can become a safety hazard for children and the elderly. Explore more innovative options such as lower cabinetry with pullout drawers. Credenzas and chests also offer easy access storage spaces, especially for linens and dishes. 
• Consider having a master bedroom on the first level. As you age, it may become more difficult to get up and down the stairs. Plan for the possibility of limited mobility, and design your bathroom with shallow tubs, handrails, higher toilet seats, and wide doorways and hallways. With today’s creative design, these features can be both unobtrusive and attractive.
• Invest in a home security system, such as ADT, and install intercoms throughout the house. This adds a sense of safety and aids in communication.
• Finally, and most importantly, make sure that you have the proper homeowners insurance. Should anything happen to your home, the more adequate coverage you have, the better. It may also be helpful to look into insurance policies that are geographically specific, such as flood insurance if your home is located along a coastline.

Guest Contributor: Danielle Coles

 

 

The Tragedy of Pruitt-Igoe--What Have We Learned?

If you haven't heard of Pruitt-Igoe, it's likely that you've seen it. The photos and footage of the powerful demolition of the 1950s-era low-income housing in St. Louis have certainly made their rounds since the event in 1972. At its peak occupancy in 1957, Pruitt-Igoe's 33 high-rise buildings housed 15,000 people, but decline was swift and painful. Despite the best of intentions through the United States Housing Act of 1949, the housing project quickly turned into an axis of crime. An Economist article describes the eventual tragic situation:

 By the late 1960s the buildings had been denuded of its residents, the number of windows broken to the point where it was possible to see straight through to the other side. The residents that remained had to act tough for the chance to come and go unmolested.

 The project was overtaken with drug deals, theft, and arson. Proponents of the original project were quick to jump to the conclusion that something in the architectural scheme must have been flawed - they cited the skip-stop elevators, height of the buildings, etc. However, a New York Times article from the last month compares Pruitt-Igoe and a very architecturally similar housing development in the Chelsea area of New York City - the successful cousin of Pruitt-Igoe. This development has been so successful that it is still occupied by so many of the original tenants that, despite it not being an official retirement community, it still qualifies for special grants in that realm. So what went wrong with Pruitt-Igoe?

 In the last few years, fascinating interviews with past residents and politicians, scholarly papers, and a documentary have helped us to conclude that Pruitt-Igoe's demise cannot be strictly identified as having to do with architectural structure; rather, a multitude of factors came into play. Conflicting movements from the Housing Act both encouraged people to move to the suburbs and also invested funds in low-income housing. Money for upkeep of the buildings was severely lacking. The creation of the physical community (buildings, parks) did not include any development of the social community (such as employment programs). Rather than being an issue of strictly architectural structure, Pruitt-Igoe had one of social infrastructure. Pruitt-Igoe's demise heralded the total loss of faith in government bureaucracies' ability to solve social problems.

If this depresses you, worry not. These days we see CDCs (community development corporations) and other community based organization stepping into this realm of developing social infrastructure along side the built environment. The redevelopment effort in public housing has taken on new approaches that build and rehab affordable housing but also that assure that building community with residents is at the center. It certainly took a tragic turn of events to learn it, but we now know there's more to housing than the house or apartment itself.

Guest Contributor: Hannah Silver