The Effect of Compact City in Sustainable Development

The effect of Compact city in sustainable development

Ardalan Karimi*

Department of Architecture, Ilkhchi Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ilkhchi, Iran

ABSTRACT:Compact city development has, over the last 20 years or so, emerged as the preferred response to the goal of sustainable development. As such, it is pertinent to examine planning practices to see whether the traditional economic bias in planning is now balanced by aims and practices in support of environmental and social sustainability. In this light the social, environmental, and economic goals linked to densification and mixed use development will be the main focus of this article. In addition, the article assesses whether distinct institutional practices support the balancing of these goals. The article concludes that on a discursive level, social, environmental and economic goals are represented in compact city strategies. Institutional practices, however, show that economic goals remain at the core of planning. Environmental and social aims still play second fiddle, but new measures are in development that may gradually strengthen their influence over urban development practices.

Keywords: compact city, sustainability, urban planning, urban development

INTRODUCTION

From the outset, the main purpose of planning was place development in a stricter, economic sense, and to create jobs, secure housing, and deliver infrastructure (Burton, 2010). Complex goals, such as sustainable development and public health, have gradually been added to the planning agenda in the past 20 years (Burton, 2010). Thus, it is pertinent to examine whether the traditional economic bias in planning has gradually been balanced by aims and practices in support of environmental and social sustainability.

During the 1990s, the discourse on sustainable development and planning produced the notion of compact city development that became a hegemonic response to the challenges of sustainable development.ideally, a compact city secures socially beneficial, economically viable, and environmentally sound development through dense and mixed use patterns that rely on sustainable transportation .

More specifically, scholars have discussed to what extent it produces the expected social, environmental and economic benefits (Thomas,1996)

This line of research directs attention to the tripartite composition of sustainable development – economic, environmental and social sustainability - and opens the way for cross-domain analyses .This article follows this path by showing how the compact city ideal and especially its three sustainability dimensions is justified and practiced in urban planning. The main research question driving this article is: How is the compact city ideal interpreted within urban planning, and what is the position of economic, environmental and social sustainability in compact city strategies? This main question is further explored by asking: What are the main social, environmental, and economic goals and ideas linked to densification and mixed use development? To what extent is the balancing of these goals supported by distinct institutional practices?

*Corresponding Author:

Email address:

The article identifies the sustainability goals clearly linked to the preferred measures of compact city development, namely densification and mixed use development (Burton, 2010).Attention is also given to concrete institutional practices and to what extent they are developed to support sustainability goals so that they may be balanced against each other on an equal footing. Together, the article highlights environmental, economic and social sustainability’s position within compact city development.

RESULTS

In recent years city planners, developers and policymakers have increasingly looked towards designing a more ‘compact city’ in order to achieve a more sustainable urban form. There are many perceived benefits of the compact city, which include: less car dependency thus lower emissions, reduced energy consumption, better public transport services, increased overall accessibility, the re-use of infrastructure and previously developed land, a rejuvenation of existing urban areas and urban vitality, a higher quality of life, the preservation of green space, and the creation of a milieu for enhanced business and trading activities. (Williams, 2000) As ‘sustainable development’ relies upon the combination of economic, social and environmental elements, it is important for the compact city to show improvements across all three spheres and for most, if not all of the perceived benefits listed above to become a reality. Unfortunately for proponents of the compact city model, in-depth research has shown that simply employing policies to stimulate compact city style development will not necessarily lead to sustainability of the urban environment. In this essay, I will argue that the compact city model is necessary, but not sufficient for sustainability, and that some aspects of intensification, in some places, have contributed to sustainability, whilst others have clearly not.

The solution to the unsustainable nature of cities throughout the world has been frequently referred to as making these cities more compact to make better use of the resources currently available. Many planners and policymakers believe that sustainable communities are places that exhibit a compact urban form. (Breheny,2001) However, there is debate about the very definition of a compact city, and in particular what policies need to be undertaken to achieve urban compaction, let alone whether these particular policies in fact do contribute to sustainability. policies of urban compaction involve the promotion of urban regeneration, the revitalisation of town centers, restraint on development in rural areas, higher densities, mixed-use development, promotion of public transport and the concentration of urban development at public transport nodes. many of these policies as being uneconomic, and against the wishes of the general population who have characterized the twentieth century by a rejection of inner city living, and the invention of suburbia. The nature of intensification is also important; while development in mixed-use town centers is usually perceived to have a positive effect, especially if landscaping and urban design improvements are subsequently implemented, infill housing developments in residential suburbs are frequently perceived as being of poor quality and therefore having a detrimental effect on the environment, and sustainability in general.

One of the strongest arguments for the compact city model, in the opinion of its advocates, is the theory that a compact city will reduce the need to travel, and will increase the feasibility of public transport, thus reducing emissions and contributing to environmental sustainability. the more you move away from a town center the less efficient services become. Public transport becomes either more expensive or more scarce (or both), sewers and rubbish collection become inefficient. high-density environments can provide the critical mass necessary to make public services work more efficiently. However, the results of empirical testing by a number of researchers (Breheny, 2001) linking higher densities with a reduced number of trips made by cars have proved less than conclusive. Any significant switch to public transport has been found to require significantly higher densities than currently evident in suburbs, while other factors such as gasoline prices have proved to be just as important as urban density in determining the transport mode used by residents. The type of trip undertaken by residents also influences the impact of intensification, while short trips to local employment or shopping may decrease; there is no evidence that urban density will have any impact upon those seeking specialized employment or a different shopping experience and/or leisure pursuit. Growth in car ownership as well as increasingly diffuse life patterns are considerable factors that have led to the inability to reduce travel demands of energy-rich modes of transport, and it seems that changes outside the realm of planning through education or culture change will be required to influence travel patterns at a sustained level. (Williams, 2000)

DISCUSSION

There is a widespread consensus that progress towards sustainable development is essential. Human activity cannot continue to use resources at the present rate without jeopardizing opportunities for future generations. Cities are the main arena of human activity, but they are also the greatest consumers of natural resources. However, urban sustainability is not just about environmental concerns, it is also about economic viability, liveability and social equity. Recently, much attention has focused on the relationship between urban form and sustainability, the suggestion being that the shape and density of cities can have implications for their future. From this debate, strong arguments are emerging that the compact city is the most sustainable urban form.(Breheny,2001)

Compact City is a high density urban settlement that has the following main characteristics:

In recent years city planners, developers and policymakers have increasingly looked towards designing a more compact city in order to achieve a more sustainable urban form. Policies of urban compaction involve the promotion of urban regeneration, the revitalisation of town centers, restraint on development in rural areas, higher densities, mixed-use development, promotion of public transport and the concentration of urban development at public transport nodes. There are many perceived benefits of the compact city over urban sprawl, which include: less car dependency thus lower emissions, reduced energy consumption, better public transport services, increased overall accessibility, the re-use of infrastructure and previously developed land, a regeneration of existing urban areas and urban vitality, a higher quality of life, the preservation of green space, and the creation of a milieu for enhanced business and trading activities. As sustainable development relies upon the combination of economic, social and environmental elements. The following are some of the issues that should be addressed for the compact city to show improvements across all three spheres. .(Breheny,2001)

Connected Centres of Social and Commercial Activities

The creation of the modern Compact City demands the rejection of single-function development and the dominance of the car. The issues to be addressed are:

Table 2.2. Relation of urban sustainability with compact city details

The Compact City addresses these issues because it grows around centres of social and commercial activity located at public transport nodes. These provide the focal points around which neighbourhoods develop. The Compact City is a network of these neighbourhood, each with its own parks and public spaces and accommodating a diversity of overlapping private and public activities. London’s historic structure of towns, villages, squares and parks is typical of a polycentric pattern of development. Most importantly, these neighbourhoods bring work and facilities within convenient reach of the community, and this proximity means less driving for everyday needs. In large cities, Mass transit systems can provide high-speed cross-town travel by linking one neighbourhood centre with another, leaving local distribution to local systems. This reduces the volume and impact of through traffic, which can be calmed and controlled, particularly around the public heart of neighbourhoods. Local trains, light railway systems and electric buses become more effective, and cycling and walking more pleasant. Congestion and pollution in the streets are drastically reduced and the sense of security and conviviality of public space is increased.(Elkin,2012)

Community-Based Society

Sustainable Compact Cities could reinstate the city as the ideal habitat for a community-based society. It is an established type of urban structure that can be interpreted in all manner of ways in response to all manner of cultures. Cities should be about the people they shelter, about face-to-face contact, about condensing the ferment of human activity, about generating and expressing local culture. Whether in a temperate or an extreme climate, in a rich or poor society, the long-term aim of sustainable development is to create a flexible structure for a vigorous community within a healthy and non-polluting environment.

Proximity

Proximity, the provision of good public space, the presence of natural landscape and the exploitation of new urban technologies can radically improve the quality of air and of life in the dense city. Another benefit of compactness is that the countryside itself is protected from the encroachment of urban development. The concentration of diverse activities, rather than the grouping of similar activities, can make for more efficient use of energy. The Compact City can provide an environment as beautiful as that of the countryside.

Overlapping

The whole premise of the Compact City is that interventions trigger further opportunities for efficiency. A Compact City composed of overlapping activities, for instance, is more convivial and can reduce the need for car journeys, which in turn dramatically reduces the energy used for transportation - usually a quarter of a city’s overall energy consumption. Fewer cars mean less congestion and better air quality, which in turn encourages cycling and walking rather than driving. Better air quality makes opening windows to fresh air more attractive than turning on filtered air-conditioners.

Rich Urban Landscaping

There are other important environmental advantages to a compact form of city that has fewer roads but more landscaped public spaces. Parks, gardens, trees and other landscaping provide vegetation that shades and cools streets, courtyards and buildings in summer. Cities are generally 1-20C warmer than their hinterland. The overall effect of rich urban landscaping is to reduce the heat 'bloom' of cities, measurably reducing the need for air-conditioning. Plants dampen noise levels and filter pollution, absorb carbon dioxide and produce oxygen - further factors that reduce the need for air-conditioning to supply cooled fresh air to buildings in what would otherwise be hot and polluted urban areas. Urban landscape absorbs rain, reducing the discharge of urban rainfall and storm water. Landscape plays an important psychological role in the city and can sustain a wide diversity of urban wildlife.

Reduced Waste of Energy

A Compact City reduces the waste of energy. Generating electric power produces hot water as a by-product, which in conventional power plants is simply wasted. Local Combined Heat and Power plants can be used both to distribute electricity and, due to their proximity, to pipe hot water directly into buildings. This can more than double the efficiency of conventional urban power distribution. City rubbish, which is usually either dumped as landfill or incinerated, both with polluting effects, can be burned by local CHPs and supply up to 30 percent of a community’s energy needs. In a city that combines a variety of activities, it is easier to transfer waste heat from one activity to another. Excess heat generated by offices, for example, is usually dissipated into the environment, but it can be reused in hospitals, homes, hotels or schools if they are reasonably close.(Jenks,2013)

Recycled Human Waste

Human waste that is rich in nutrients is currently discharged in such high concentrations that it poisons the environment. It can instead be recycled to produce methane fuel pellets and fertilizers. Grey water can be filtered through natural systems on site and be re-used for irrigation of urban landscape or to restock local aquifers. Experimental sewerage treatment schemes that discharge their waste below industrial forestry have been shown both to increase the growth rate of the forests, woods and parks and to restock local aquifers with purified water. Clean water is recognized as the critical resource of the coming millennium, and we must develop systems that maxim the efficiency of its use.

REFERENCES

-Breheny, M. (2001) “Densities and Sustainable Cities: the UK experience.” in M. Echenique and A. Saint (eds.)Cities for the New Millennium,London.

-Burton, E. (2010) “The Potential of the Compact City for Promoting Social Equity.” in K. Williams, E. Burton and M. Jenks (eds.)Achieving Sustainable Urban Form,London.

-Elkin, T., McLaren, D. and Hillman, M. (2012)Reviving the City: towards sustainable urban development,London.

-Jenks, M., Burton, E. and Williams, K. (Editors), 2013,The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form

-Rogers, R. and Burdett, R. “Let’s Cram More into the City.” in M. Echenique and A. Saint (eds.)Cities for the New Millennium,Londo.

-Thomas, L. and Cousins W. (1996) “The Compact City: a successful, desirable and achievable urban form?” in M. Jenks, E. Burton and K. Williams (eds.)The Compact City: a sustainable urban form?London.

-Williams, K., Burton E. and Jenks, M., 2000,Achieving Sustainable Urban Form,London