Saturday, January 20, 2007
Its the Environment . . .
It really bothers me to see so many people who I know to be passionate and sincere environmentalists oppose "high-density" development in Downtown Columbia. High Density development leaves a much, much smaller environmental footprint on our earth than suburban sprawl. Basically, thats the big choice we are going to make here in Columbia. Because if we don't allow high density development in Downtown Columbia, those people who would have lived (or employers who would have located)in Downtown Columbia are going to live somewhere else and most likely they will end up locating someplace that is currently wild or farmland. And then they will waste energy and pollute when they make their longer commutes to work. Think of all the energy we could save if we had a lot of residences, retail business and employers located within walking distance of each other. Think of all the pollution we save when we walk instead of drive. Think how much healther we would be if we walked more and drove less.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Good points.
Few people seem to see this point, I can not figure out why.
More get it than you think.
However, making that argument to justify new construction in Columbia's Town Center than to promote rehabing already existing commercial and residential buildings in Baltimore and DC, whose combined populations have dropped more than 100,000 in the past 15 years, doesn't make sense. Repurpose brownspace, don't consume more greenspace and say that's being green.
Anon. "10:54" makes a good point in that it is important to bring people back into Baltimore (and all our existing cities).
But Columbia is one of our existing cities. I don't consider downtown Columbia to be "greensapce." And I think almost everyone wants to ensure that a new downtown has a good park system and lots of livable, usable openspace.
The "Village of Town Center" definitely includes greenspace, including throughout the Lakefront area, the Crescent, near HCC, and the tunnel of trees along Governor Warfield, going up the hill to Twin Rivers.
Unforunately, good park systems are in the eyes of the beholders, some of them seeing 'green' in a completely different context.
How many odd, non-green features to be added to Symphony Woods are mentioned in the current incarnation of the 30-year plan and others' proposals for things to build around some large, tree-clearing traffic circle at Little Patuxent and South Entrance?
Post a Comment