Q&A with Andres Duany – Episode 1

We are excited to announce the launch of a new series, Q&A with Andres Duany. The first episode is now live on YouTube! This is a short format web series solely focused on curated questions on various topics through the lens of urbanism, answered by Andres Duany. Sometimes lectures tend to exclude the important feedback and interaction facilitated by a stirring Q&A. Here Andres takes his time to answer questions he would not otherwise have the opportunity to address in a live audience setting. In this first episode, he talks about his favorite city, gives advice to young professionals, points out the difference between orthodoxy and heterodoxy, and more.

Stay tuned for your chance to submit your questions, which may be included in future episodes.

Watch the series and subscribe to DPZ CoDesign’s YouTube channel to stay informed.

Outreach for A More Inclusive 21st Century

ENGAGING THE VIRTUAL & THE REAL

To say that the past six months have changed everything, is hardly an understatement. The way we live, work, play, communicate, and even the way we think have required major adjustments. Many of our daily activities have become virtual, remote, and/or guided by new safety protocols. Meanwhile, as many of us tuned in to get daily pandemic updates we witnessed a seemingly sudden, but long-time evolving and irrevocable social awakening. Those of us in the design profession should feel charged with imagining and planning for a new public reality that awaits us after this period of private seclusion, and we should be honing the tools we will use to get there.

THE GOOD NEWS

The good news is that this pandemic arrived at a time when technology was already in place to allow meaningful exchanges with clients, project stakeholders, and permitting authorities via video-conference, document sharing, and other online platforms. Inhabiting that 100% virtual world has required a mental shift by most, but it has taught us useful lessons for going forward.

 

 

ZOOM FATIGUE

Though we might be zoomed-out with laptop-fatigue by now, what we’ve learned is that the sharing of ideas on a small screen has certain advantages. While nothing replaces the energy and the immediacy of in-person meetings and charrettes, walking your audience through a sequence of images where you can point precisely to details and have anyone mark-up a drawing, post a comment, or engage in a sidebar chat, provides a more intimate and robust exchange than is often possible in an auditorium or a conference room. It also empowers individuals who might not otherwise step up to a microphone or raise their hand in a crowded room to pose a question. Whether having a face to face session with another colleague, attending a small class, or participating in a webinar with a hundred participants, video-conferencing is a tool that is here to stay.

THE DIGITAL DOWNSIDE/ UPSIDE

The downside to this tech-enhanced forum is that those of us on the wrong side of the digital divide are largely left out of the conversation. As we are reminded of the social and economic inequities affecting so many of our neighbors, those of us designing for the public realm need to not only be more inclusive about how we design our communities but also how we engage those more disenfranchised residents. In light of this many of our design narratives and the ways we produce and share ideas will need further re-calibration.

An upside of the pandemic is that it has spurred efforts by Internet Service Providers, local governments, and community organizations to step in to help poor families gain free or low-cost internet access and devices for virtual schooling and working from home. The expansion of digital outreach is helping to keep communities informed and connected at a time of social distancing.

 

CONNECTING = NEW PLATFORMS + TRADITIONAL OUTREACH

However, we cannot forget the effectiveness of older, more tactile tools like printed surveys, flyers and newsletters that can inform those not so inclined to connect online. We need to utilize simpler, more approachable resources when necessary to better engage the elderly, lower-income folks, racial/ ethnic minorities, and others too often excluded from the planning discourse.

As we work hard to adapt to new circumstances and renew our commitment to creating complete, connected and convivial places, we at DPZ remain devoted to confronting, sorting through and solving complex issues. Furthermore, in order to bring to life visions that are responsive and practical, we must listen more than ever to the actual needs of those whom we are serving. So, until the day we can safely return to interactive, in-person discussions we will hold virtual charrettes, schedule old-school phone conferences, distribute hardcopy documents, and employ any tool at our disposal to guarantee that our dedication to a dynamic, informative, and inclusive design process continues.

Communities Faring Well by Design

A global pandemic is the type of resiliency test we plan for, but hope never occurs. We are happy to report that amidst the current difficulties, our compact, walkable, mixed-use, and multigenerational communities are not only faring well but are proving to be a source of comfort to their residents as they shelter in place.

The bonds of community—largely forged in those physically interactive and convivial third places we temporarily need to avoid—have resulted in a human infrastructure of support, and neighbors helping neighbors that is particularly useful to those most vulnerable. While social gathering spaces like community centers, plazas, playgrounds, and cafes take a pause, a second, less glamorous tier of neighborhood features are gaining newfound appreciation in keeping residents connected while at a safe distance.

• Live-work units – a popular fixture in many of our neighborhood centers and pioneered by DPZ as far back as Seaside, have re-introduced Americans to creative ways to integrate, yet separate, work space with residential space. They are perfect for remote working during times when “stay-at-home” regulations are essential for curbing the spread of a virus.
• Alleys & Pedestrian Paths –are practical alternate routes for exercising alone or efficiently dropping off food at that elderly neighbor’s house.
• Accessory Dwelling Units or Granny Flats—are welcome physical-distancing assets to protect a vulnerable relative or for quarantining an essential worker in the family.
• Well-connected, shaded, pedestrian-friendly streets – are the ideal amenity to take much needed walks around the block and stroll with the baby and/or the pets. And when too many neighbors are out, the streets easily transform into more ample, shared-space promenades.
• Meaningful open space networks—the mindful assemblages of open space in the form of larger parks and nature preserves are ideal for residents to refresh and stay active at appropriate “social distances”. Kentlands’s lakes and woodland paths were deliberately woven into the greater trail and greenways network. Whether for a vigorous bike ride or a pleasant walk, residents have a regional recreational system to access.
• The front porch, an iconic staple of DPZ towns, makes for a great way to socialize and people-watch from afar – porch or Zoom happy hours, which would you prefer? 🤔

At DPZ’s Middleton Hills and The Kentlands, two exemplary, lifelong communities, we are hearing about countless acts of neighborly interaction during this difficult time.  Please read below to learn what some of our residents had to say about their experiences with each other and their surroundings:

MIDDLETON HILLS

Middleton Hills & COVID-19: Resident Testimonial | April 2020

A letter shared by Jane Grabowski-Miller, formerly with the development team at Erdman Holdings where she served as Town Architect, from a Middleton Hills resident:

“Hi Jane,

The onset of the Coronavirus has given rise to our even deeper appreciation of our neighborhood, and I want to share that with you. Over the ten years we have lived here, we have grown quite close with our “alley neighbors” and we socialize regularly. John and I are the oldest, hence the grandparents of the group. It was no surprise that we have had regular contact from these friends in recent weeks offering food, volunteering to pick up groceries, and just generally checking to be sure we are okay.

Although our primary contacts have been via the alley behind us, our house faces Erdman Boulevard, the neighborhood’s “Main Street,” and before our trees leaf out we enjoy a nice view of the wetland area from our living room. It is hard to look out now without seeing folks out strolling on Erdman or enjoying the new boardwalk near the water. The trees have matured and we now host many birds and waterfowl, including a pair of Sandhill Cranes that return each year. As in other places these days, there is an organized effort to collectively entertain the kids with virtual scavenger hunts and other creative ideas so lots of sidewalk chalk in use.

Not a day goes by when we don’t feel fortunate to live here. Even in the midst of a pandemic the neighborhood seems to have lived up to its potential in so many significant respects. I know you were an integral part of making it a reality and I just wanted to take a moment to say thank you.”

 

THE KENTLANDS

Kentlands & COVID-19: Resident Testimonials | April 2020

In response to a Homeowner Association survey about life during the lockdown, here are some highlights shared by Kentlands residents who had much to say:

Karen G.
“ My husband and I have lived here for 11 years… and there is no place I’d rather be during the Covid19 crisis. Our community is a wonderful mix of multiple generations… Every morning and afternoon we go for a long walk. We see families, young and old, riding bikes, skating, walking their dogs, admiring the beautiful landscape throughout the community. People have been very good about checking in on each other.

Our youngest son is a server at a family run community restaurant that cares about their employees. They actually have a group chat going to keep everyone from feeling isolated…I know that our community will get through this, it may take a while, but as bad as it is, we have the Kentlands.“

Carolina B.
“ Personally, I have always believed that living in the Kentlands is nothing but a positive thing …so easy to just walk next door to a store and grab any item without hesitation… this community has always made me feel spoiled – there is nothing that I cannot do within walking distance; including work- since the office where I work is also conveniently located in the Kentlands.”

Linda W.
“Last spring I moved from my townhouse to a condo …I was eager to stay within the community… I am so glad that I made this move…I cannot begin to tell you about the sense of community in my building.

Shortly after I moved in I had emergency surgery on my knee due to an infection…The residents in my building were absolutely wonderful… brought in groceries…got my mail daily… took out my trash and recycling as needed… brought me food or materials to keep me busy…and many visited…we began to get to know each other…

This sprit has carried on to these times of social isolation. I have a compromised immune system and have not left the building for three weeks as of this writing. Once again, the spirit of this community is being manifested. There has been an effort to bring in groceries …and… a daily call from a Condo Board member to check on us to see if there is anything we need…even daily sanitizing of apartment door knobs, elevator buttons, the outside keypad, etc…

I believe the spirit of the Kentlands/Lakelands communities, nurtured by the New Urbanism precepts, fosters a community spirit that is exemplified by what I have experienced here.”

Sally M.
“ Our son, his wife and our two grandchildren …out for a walk, … texted us to go to our door. We went out and stood six feet from them on our porch, with them on the sidewalk, and chatted for 15 minutes. We have done this regularly since social distancing was initiated.
Our neighbors invited us to a BYO gathering…on the Kentlands Green for wine, snacks, and conversation, at a six foot safe distance from each other…Many of our local restaurants…offer takeout with either curbside or free delivery…

Our beautiful chain of intersecting lake paths offers easy access to nature and respite from cabin fever…
So many of us know and care about each other and watch out for each other. I can’t imagine living anywhere else. So far, everything we need is nearby, and we know and help and are helped by our neighbors.”

Sheri B.
“Great opportunity to tell you how much I appreciate living in the Kentlands at this difficult time…I would never consider leaving.

What has been sustaining is the ability to walk around an area with so many varying views: the lakes, the streets with varied architecture, etc… am constantly delighted by the nooks and crannies of this area. I walk a different route each day and love the surprises I find!  The people here are wonderful!”

Luanne H.
“EVERY DAY we give thanks for living in Kentlands during this horrific time…we are so blessed and grateful to be living in the perfect neighborhood where we are very fortunate to be able to work from home.

Beauty and nature everywhere …We take daily walks or runs multiple times a day. …  common areas, paths and alleys are fun to explore ..green spaces… creeks and lakes …alive with plants and animals…daffodils and crocuses …rabbits and turtles…

We notice more people sitting on porches … using their yards more these days… …We are getting to know neighbors we haven’t met before. More people are saying hi and chatting and smiling than ever before (from 6 feet or more of course)…

The Mansion, Clubhouse, and Arts Barn amenities are currently closed, but the large grounds around them are still beautiful and very useful for social distancing…

Shopping and restaurants…wonderful to have everything we need right here…and at a variety of price ranges …

Housing for older people …your parents can live right here…easy to check on them, bring food and supplies, and they can still get out for walks if able and still maintain the right distance….

We are grateful to grocery/restaurant workers, healthcare workers, delivery workers, first responders, and our government for everything they are doing to keep us safe and healthy.

And thank you for the wonderful design of this neighborhood!”

 

On Climate Migration, Part 3: Excessive Centralization

This is a multi-part series, see Part 1 for a snippet of background and Part 2 for a discussion of regional issues.

I ended Part 2 stating that the path of the last century has preferred big – big business, big projects, big ideas – and has eroded diverse, distributed, and dynamic systems. This trend is evident in technology, where fewer and fewer players are controlling a larger part of the market. While those players used to appear benevolent, grave privacy and security concerns have surfaced with most users trapped due to our reliance on their growing centralized ecosystems. Similar trends should be in recent memory, big banks in particular, whose size and growing services blurred previous lines between investments and securities and threatened the financial system. These are examples of concentration and bigness, which breed fragility.

“The Economy of Cities” by Jane Jacobs is required reading to make many of the connections I focus on here. (see also Cities and the Economic Development of Nations: An Essay on Jane Jacobs’ Contribution to Economic Theory) While not an economist, Jacobs presents a series of case study cities whose economies have collapsed following significant concentration into single industries. Silicon Valley is on its way to future collapse following this paradigm. Concentration on a limited industry disadvantaging the other industries that make a city function creates a fragile system. At present, Silicon Valley relies on a concentrated talent pool of programmers. This skillset, however, has been the target of every city and region essentially across the planet, aiming to create a local industry. Over time the tech sector has become more reliant upon distributed datacenters and distributed computing, so there is little reason to remain concentrated aside from a concentrated talent pool for the industry giants. Given the housing conditions in the Bay Area, this is a perfect setup for failure.

As industries have avoided distribution and diversification, so have our cities. Presently those places most impacted by housing affordability shortages are cities with powerful economies. The economic development mindset has broadly assumed that cities cannot grow their own powerful economies, rather they must engage in incentive wars to attract big industrial players. Few stop to think about where those big players got their start: locally, solving local problems and branching out from there. Rather than feeling impoverished for not owning the top industry of today, cities should concentrate on creating supportive environments within which their residents can innovate. We’ve always made cities this way, until we forgot how to make cities.

The US is littered with small towns and cities, currently ignored by our vision of a productive economy. Many of these places were established on the basis of distribution using the systems most efficient at the time, typically water or rail. Others were based upon agricultural production and distribution or material extraction and refining. As technologies changed, these places which were limited in their economic diversity have languished. Yet revolution is afoot in many such places, typically mid-sized cities which have begin to revive locally grown economies. Rather than centralize our population into a dozen mega-cities, we should consider the opposite – our ability to diversify and distribute.

Big cities have limits. While they are often an efficient means of leveraging economic growth, their attractiveness leads to problems with affordability, power demands, distribution of food, and handling of waste products. But I don’t suggest that we do away with big cities, rather that we aim to have more, somewhat smaller big cities. By proactively diversifying and distributing our economy, and practicing Jacobs’ import replacement theory, we can increase our strength and resiliency. In our climate-driven future, there are few places safe from potential disaster. In fact many of our powerhouse cities are located along the coasts. With the unpredictability of our future climate, it would be a mistake to go all-in on any region.

While we could start from scratch building new places, reviving many of those places that have fallen behind in recent decades is a more responsible mission. In fact this is happening independently, albeit slowly. Akron, Ohio’s refugee resettlement program has created a new, thriving local economy, reversing the city’s decades of decline (https://research.newamericaneconomy.org/report/welcome-to-akron/). Similarly, we can establish thriving, local economies by helping people who have to move due to housing costs, climate change, and a host of other issues. Doing so increases our overall wealth, productivity, and resiliency. It also allows us to correct a host of public health problems due to both physical living conditions and depression associated with a lack of self-worth.

Climate strife provides an opportunity to re-establish a dynamic and distributed economy, and those physical manifestations of economy in the form of settlement patterns. However, we shouldn’t wait for the increasing impact of climate change to initiate change. Structural economic and physical change is possible, change has happened, and change can lead us to a better, more resilient and fulfilling future.

On Climate Migration, Part 2: The Region

This is a multi-part series, see Part 1 for a snippet of background on the problem.

I began the last part considering my regular view of the US from the air. For the most part it is unsettled or agricultural land. Villages and towns pop up all over, usually following water or rail, occasionally unprompted in agricultural areas. They follow relatively linear natural and economic systems, harking back to the great work of John Reps on planning in the American West. Generally, big and medium cities cluster along the coasts, the Mississippi River and its’ tributaries, and outliers like Chicago and Atlanta which grew as rail hubs. Not much has changed since World War II.

The past century of growth and settlement, in the US and across the world, is a historical anomaly. In our daily work at DPZ, we endlessly confront the status-quo: unwilling to change and convinced that the current way of doing things is rational, safe, and improving with each silo’ed, ignorant new regulation. But the system we all live and work in was designed as a reaction to a human history which resulted in the atrocities of WW2. The atrocities haven’t stopped. And the system has failed to deliver a future that is rational, efficient, or safe. The last century is a failed experiment. For more on the suburban experiment, read and support Strong Towns. From here on I’ll assume familiarity with the failures of the suburban experiment; our increasing poverty, social isolation, obesity, and disease.

Critique of New Urbanists typically suggests that we want to return to some prior time when we consider life to be better. This is a fallacy. Increases in social liberalism have been significant, important, and must continue to make change and gain momentum. Technological change, access to education, and a myriad of other opportunities have certainly been generally positive. But the suburban pattern of growth has been a cancer thrust upon society. Continuation of this pattern is simply not an option if we want a future. Unfortunately for every house or apartment in historic areas and traditional, human-centric developments is matched by thousands of new houses in suburban areas. This pattern increases future climate threat and erodes society.

Climate migration presents an opportunity to change patterns of development and correct issues of social isolation, increased disease, and re-balance economic systems to benefit a society more broadly. To extract social benefit from this environmental tragedy, we must return to responsible regional planning before major migration begins. Should we take the normal route and wait, current patterns will continue, perpetuating growing metropoles and mega-regions. The default setting is ignorant of regional watersheds, arable soils, the suburbanization of poverty, and the increasing wealth disparity.

Preservation of viable agricultural land is a central threat resulting from climate migration. The problem is clear: mild climates are best suited for agriculture and most desirable to humans, yet they are, and will be, limited. In regions dominated by successful agriculture, farm owners are keen to protect their future ability to develop their property. At some point, subdividing agricultural land into, typically, 5-acre estates is more profitable than continuing to operate the farm. This is the classic property rights vs. planning issue. A few years ago we saw a last minute defeat in limiting agricultural subdivision to 20 acres or greater in New Mexico, where the 5 acre allowance was retained. In other instances, we’ve aimed at allowing rural growth through a system that creates new towns rather than subdivisions, and retains some portion of agricultural lands in perpetuity. Future regional planning must grapple with this issue to preserve arable land yet accommodate sufficient and equitable growth.

Beyond food source preservation, directing regional growth patterns affects our ability to mitigate the ongoing greenhouse feedback cycle. Architecture 2030 has made clear the need and ability to change the energy use paradigm in buildings. Yet tying land use and transportation to health and climate change mitigation has not been broadly successful. And where this has been successful, its implementation has been slow and flawed. California exemplifies this condition where state-wide legislation has been easily side-stepped by big suburban home builders and local municipalities lack both technical skills and political will to enact meaningful local policy. I refrain from extolling the virtues of compact and connected settlements patterns in the realms of health and social support systems as the research here is clear and overwhelming. But another aspect of social support will be important – the ability of communities to act in semi-autonomous governance (see Andres Duany’s subsidiarity theory). Beyond health and social reasons, compact and connected development is more efficient for transportation, infrastructure, and energy management. While the post-2008 recession saw an increase in regional planning with the HUD-EPA-DOT partnership, that has since been dissolved and regional planning had all but disappeared.

To reintroduce regional planning to the US consciousness, we must consider two major land mines: preservation of choice and increasing income disparity. Many affluent people assume that planning will reduce choice by requiring people to live in small apartments while many poor and working class people assume that planning will result in increased cost and displacement. There are valid reasons for these assumptions on both sides. We can accommodate significant growth and avoid ultra-urbanization while also avoiding displacement; this requires distributed and diverse growth. But it also necessitates understanding and confronting systemic issues beyond growth patterns. Manipulation of market dynamics to benefit a specific portion of the population is the greatest of these systemic issues. Luckily these issues are gaining public scrutiny, but change is not likely to be quick or comprehensive. Until most of these issues are addressed, markets will continue to skew towards unsustainable development patterns and increasing displacement of communities of color as well as poor households.

Assumptions of growth and opportunity is a blind spot in our current economic model, which has adverse physical consequences. The path of the last century has preferred big – big business, big projects, big ideas. Jane Jacobs’ most important text, “The Economy of Cities”, warns of the consequences of big thinking. Changing this paradigm is a requirement of future sustainability and equity. Diverse, distributed, and dynamic systems are the most resilient and provide the greatest economic opportunity in aggregate. Climate strife provides an opportunity to re-establish a dynamic and distributed economy, and those physical manifestations of economy in the form of settlement patterns.

Changing our assumptions of the economic model unlocks our future resilience. More on this to come.

Planning for Adaptation [Podcast]

Listen to Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk on the Future of the American City podcast, interviewed by Charles Waldheim: Listen here.

Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk is a pioneering urban planner, architect, and educator. She has been instrumental in developing the City of Miami’s form-based zoning code, Miami 21. Her recent work and teaching focuses on built environment adaptation to climate change.

About Future of the American City

An initiative of the Harvard Graduate School of Design that presents alternative futures and convenes conversations about how we live, where we live. Supported by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation and generous donors to the American Cities Fund. Future of the American City is curated by the Office for Urbanization, with production by Aziz Barbar, Charlie Gaillard, Jeffrey S. Nesbit, and Mercedes Peralta.

On Climate Migration, Part 1: The Problem

I often find myself flying across the US, choosing the window seat because its more comfortable and also more interesting. While this is a consequence of moving across the country, where much of my professional work remains in the Midwest and East, it provides a lot of fodder for thought about humans, settlements, natural systems, economics, and climate change. In fact, climate change is part of the reason I moved.

As an early-wave climate migrant, I’ve spent considerable time thinking about the looming problems and opportunities of the coming climate migration. I’ll touch more on the problems and opportunities at a later time; the subject of migration and climate refugees requires more immediate attention and understanding. Being in the US, we have few connections to global patterns of migration and strife. But most others outside our boarders are well aware of the relationship between climate, strife, access to food and water, rising seas, and patterns of temperature and seasons. Remaining willfully ignorant doesn’t serve anybody.

In the US, we find ourselves beyond ignorance, residing in the realm of lies and fear. In my professional career, in Florida, I have directly witnessed regional entities manipulating interpretations of IPCC research in order to keep residents in the dark and not spook the real estate market. And that was before Rick Scott was governor, who outlawed talk of climate change and sea level rise in the state house. Clearly there are reasons why I left South Florida and the state entirely. Here are some inconvenient facts. The IPCC estimates don’t account for increased ice sheet melt which is all over the news currently. Areas close to the Everglades are actually lower than most coastal properties along the limestone ridge, which is where all the new housing is being built. Some key aquifers have been poisoned by sewage for years and now nuclear waste. Sugar farms continue to block the natural flow of Lake Okeechobee which should flow into the Everglades and recharge the primary aquifer, which is too low to hold out salt water intrusion. Instead the lake is forced out two primary rivers which caused the recent catastrophic algal blooms due to fertilizer runoff from farms. During the 6 years that I lived on Miami Beach, the rise of water was a regular experience. In fact the City of Miami Beach has had to work on its own, without the state, to address climate issues, including raising West Avenue. And the populous remains ignorant. Discussion is blocked in part due to fears of effects on real estate value. But this is not just about Florida.

Florida is symptomatic or more significant issues of ignorance, lies, and fear. In a recent discussion about the Paradise fires in California, I finally heard some rational conclusions: perhaps we shouldn’t build back here. This high-profile disaster is just one of thousands of disasters occurring across the US, not counting elsewhere in the world. A colleague, Laura Clemmons, who works in the world of FEMA grants and disaster recovery has been making noise for years to this end. We’re wasting incredible amounts of money building back either in places that don’t have a future or in patterns that are not sustainable. Another colleague, Jessica Millman, suggested that real estate agents be required to disclose future disaster and climate risk. Unfortunately, there is no honest and broad conversation, planning, or action. As usual, the most significantly impacted populations now and in the future are those already disenfranchised.

Of course it doesn’t have to be this way. But that takes forethought and planning. A new lens on regions, economies, and ecologies. Subjects of further discussion.

For now, I want to discuss three types of climate migrants: the able and aware, the affluent and ignorant, and the refugee. I fall into the first category of the able and aware. We pay attention to the real threat of climate change, and understand that it is now and it doesn’t stop in 2050 or 2100 or whatever dates are used to peg our estimates. We have the means to move and are doing just that; taking up residence in places that are more climate secure with good economic opportunity. Once more people are aware, good places to land will become increasingly expensive. This able and aware group will grow quickly as the reality of climate change becomes increasingly apparent.

The affluent and ignorant are generally unaware or unconcerned, and have the means to relocate as needed. For them, the burden of climate change may be significant, but they don’t have to fear relocation difficulty. Despite rising costs in more climate secure areas, new housing will be built and will generally be attainable. However many have not yet considered the inability to sell their homes, if they have considered future climate at all, which may result in downward social mobility. This group is generally concerned with business, leaving little time to consider future implications of climate change. And many, despite their educational backgrounds, are willingly ignorant of climate science. But they’ll get along alright.

Future climate refugees represent the largest portion of the US and world population. While some may have the ability to move presently, an already difficult daily life leaves little time for future planning. Many rely upon their extended families and communities for support. We found in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina that most will not or can not leave that extended support system. When there is no other choice than move, they are likely to be some of the last; housing opportunities near economic opportunity will be scarce. And where housing is available, it is likely to be substandard and within car-dominant areas, perpetuating the cycles of poverty and disenfranchisement. We should all be concerned for the future of this population; their future is our collective future.

If we continue on our current path, we are doomed. At this point, mitigating climate change is doomed. We must make changes to our development patterns, energy systems, food systems, and daily habits. But this is in order to change the climate change trajectory starting at 2050 or 2100, not between now and then. Making these changes remains critical to the future of our species. We also must begin planning for the inevitable change we have ahead of us.

We must adapt.

Nothing escapes the need for adaptation. Certainly where we live and how we build must adapt. But our economic lens must as well. We find ourselves stuck with inaction as people fear the financial implications of changes required for our survival. Ironically the fear and inaction will result in greater financial destruction than action today.

Planning ahead is our greatest hope. More on hope and change soon.

Pockets of Community

Creating infill in cities and towns in the form of “pockets of community” is an adaptive land use approach to climate change and population migration. Pockets of community, as conceived of by DPZ, are clusters of housing around a common green space. They differ from neighborhoods, which are mixed use entities that plug into cities. Pockets of community can be parts of neighborhoods, but they do not constitute full neighborhoods on their own.

DPZ has created several vibrant pockets of community in Florida throughout the last nearly 40 years. Our work is informed by principles that lead to resiliency and sustainability. We build residences to conserve energy and our construction is appropriate to place and context. We offer a wide range of styles from traditional to modern. We’ve identified seven core characteristics of community design. Here are the seven C’s:

1. Compact

Pockets of community are space efficient both in the community itself and the residences within them. They have identifiable centers and edges and the neighborhoods they are nestled into provide for basic daily needs within walking distance. Campo Sano Village in Coral Gables is one of the smaller pockets of community at 2.2 acres.

2. Convivial

There is an element of human connection that is built into the architecture of pockets of community. They prioritize the public realm by investing in meaningful public spaces and facilities that allow for the possibility to gather as community. They can be constructed in a range of styles, and they are aesthetically pleasing in their shapes and details. Aqua in Miami Beach offers shared facilities like a health club, daycare center, meeting room, indoor and outdoor swimming pools, boat docks, and storefronts with services such as a convenience store, coffee shop, and office space.

3. Connected

Pockets of community have walkways, courtyards, and paths that promote pedestrian activity and transit and provide multiple routes between destinations. The homes feel like they are part of one community, even while being part of a larger neighborhood that begins at their edges. In Bermuda Village in Coral Gables a continuous garden wall lines the sidewalks and connects the houses and their courtyards. Pockets of community are not separate from their surrounding in the typical suburban way. They are seamlessly integrated into their surroundings.

4. Complex

There is a balance of retail, residential, and civic offerings in the neighborhoods in which pockets of community are nestled. There is also a balance between pedestrian and vehicular needs. Bermuda Village offers a wide variety of civic and transport offerings along its borders.

5. Complete

Pockets of community are adaptable to whatever stage of life a person is in. Single people can rent or buy a studio or one bedroom; families with children can live in larger homes with yards. Pockets of community provide options for a range of incomes, lifestyles, and preferences. Aqua offers a mix of town homes and mid-rise apartment buildings that challenge the status quo of luxury buildings along Miami Beach.

6. Conservational

Pockets of community protect culturally and environmentally significant areas and respect regional and historic contexts and precedents. They are walkable and leave a small ecological footprint. Seaside in the Florida Panhandle was built to resemble a historic southern town with all of its associated amenities like a chapel.

7. Cost-effective

Through a process called smart phasing, pockets of community can be opened incrementally instead of all at once. They are designed intentionally so that less is more. Due to the diversity of offerings, pockets of community can be cost-effective. They have even led to an increase in property value in the neighborhoods around them. Blue Water in Tavernier Key provides a compact and accessible alternative for high-density affordable housing.

Pockets of community are places where people at almost any stage of life can thrive. In the U.S., they can be built into our great suburban sprawl. They offer a model of adaptation in land (re)usage that can be replicated almost anywhere before climate change disperses millions of people as early as 2050.

Mitigation vs Adaptation, Part 1: The Current State

There’s a lot of confusion lately about the difference between mitigation and adaptation. I think this can be be cleared up relatively easily. Mitigation means reducing the impact of climate change. Adaptation means responding to the impact of climate change. One attempts to prevent it from happening or minimize it, and the other one assumes actually that the ball has been rolling down hill and that we had better adjust to what turns out to be really pretty bad news. Interestingly enough, both sides actually are not in agreement with each other.

There are some who think that we should continue to mitigate, and that’s obvious that we should, because we can always reduce our impact, but there are others who think that any acceptance of adaptation implies giving up on mitigating climate change. I think part of the problem is that the news is awful. Like every one of the metrics actually are going very badly and quickly. Between Kyoto and Paris and most recently Poland, there is very little one can actually be optimistic about. There’s a certain kind of wishful thinking that we need to employ, we need to do it, therefore we will do it.

I think one of the reasons is that climate change has been simply reduced to measuring the impact of carbon – which is inevitable. I mean, we as human beings generate carbon and we consume the good life. Any kind of measure of the good life that we have requires carbon.

So the reduction of carbon actually cuts right across the wellbeing or the immediate wellbeing of too many people. Also the problem is that everybody in the world has to behave, for example, the way that the Norwegians are hoping to reduce their footprint. While, for example, the Chinese continues to build coal fired power plants. It is the first worldwide environmental crisis, unlike the watershed and the airsheds that we have had successes with. This one is worldwide, and so there’s a kind of disempowerment of the small group of the community.

If you want to do something about mitigating climate change, you pick up a sign and you go and have a demonstration in front of the United Nations meeting. You can basically just appeal to the politicians. The great thing about adaptation is that it’s local. There’s a kind of circling of the wagons that says, you know what? I’m going to take care of having my food supplies nearby in my food shed. I’m going to find out where my energy is coming from; whether it’s from my rooftop solar or the nearby power plant. I’m going to make sure that schooling is nearby so that if I can’t drive my kids some distance, the kids can walk. I’m going to make sure that my community is complete, and that I don’t have to actually have to go great distances to find a doctor or to find or buy the ordinary daily things that I need. So the great thing about adaptation is that it empowers the individual and the community to do something about it.

It has certain positive consequences for mitigation, for example, if everything is nearby, you would drive less, which of course reduces the carbon of tailpipe emission. If your food is nearby, it doesn’t have to be transported across the continent. Such as berries come from Chile and lettuce comes from California.

Actually the solar panels on the rooftop are necessary to bridge the Brownouts whenever electricity gets a little dicey, that is good for the environment. It also mitigates, so the argument is not what to do, it is what to lead with. Do you lead with mitigation? Let’s save the planet as a whole, or do you lead your argument with adaptation – let us see what we can do for ourselves, for our community?

I believe that within five or 10 years, and I would give a date – 2030, which is the threshold of the meeting on climate that took place in Poland. 2030, I think the news are likely to continue to be very bad, and at that point, people will be dispirited. They will lose their positive outlook and will be looking for something else. I believe that communities and those who plan communities, those of us who actually are able to create communities that are adapted to climate change, should be ready with built models that demonstrate that life can indeed be very nice.

It’s not a matter of suffering. It’s not a matter of penance. It’s not a matter of being punished, because of climate change. It is actually a more sensible way to live within your local means, within your pedestrian shed, within your energy shed, within your watershed, within your food shed. It actually makes a lot of sense and it could give rise to some very nice daily lives.

So I would urge people actually to give more credence to adaptation so that we’re ready when in fact, what I call the Pearl Harbor moment comes. You know, when somebody says, oh, oops, we have actually reached a tipping point, we’re not going to make it. Let’s now get together and do something about it.

The way this nation often comes together is when there’s a real crisis. I think we should be ready with a strategic plan, and that plan is the adaptive community.