George Frantz wrote: > Nodal development certainly is agreat idea, although the article leaves the > definition of "nodal development" to the imagination. But then again so > does a lot of the planning literature I read. > > I'm also only batting .400 in my efforts to get local municipalities to > adopt zoning regulations that permit higher residential densities and > mixed-use development as a means of channeling growth to better protect open > space and make more efficient use of existing infrastructure, including > streets and roads. > > As for myself I have a pretty definitive definition of nodal development: > compact communities with populations densities in the range of 20,000 persons > per square mile or about 12 residential units per acrea. By comparison the > overall population density of Ithaca NY (city only) is about 5,500 persons > per square mile and the residential unit density of Fall Creek only 7-7.5 > dwellings per acre. Of course the numbers are much lower and even more > disastrous from the standpoint of sustainbility outside the city itself. ---
You're right that nodal development is here (as is usually the case) defined vaguely. In this case, that's a consequence of the way we divided up categories, with this article attempting to focus primarily on roads and transportation infrastructure. These subjects are all tied together, of course, and not very separable, but some days that's the best we can do. In contemplating a world where peak oil has come to pass, I can't say I'm comfortable specifying units/acre or even human density. I suspect that all of the variables will be different. My best guess is that cities will be vastly denser, while the countryside returns to more or less the historic patterns that served before the automobile, with villages and hamlets that largely supported the agricultural communities around them. The one place in Tompkins County where I think that pattern will change, as I noted in the article, is along new Route 13 from about Ithaca High School to the junction with 366 by the NYSEG building. That's a whole new road blasted out of the hillside, and I expect the intersections along it to continue as/grow as nodes. Outside of the cities, villages, and historic hamlets, plus the Route 13 nodes, the main question I hope people can answer is whether their house will work as a farmhouse. If it will, then they're probably okay where they are. If they're not, they have a lot of thinking to do, hopefully followed by some action. My own house qualifies as a "maybe" - it's walkably close to the 13/366 overlap that's starting to emerge as a hamletish node, and if I can manage to buy some land on the hillside behind me, I might be able to properly think of it as a farmhouse too. It wasn't built that way, though - it's classic 1920's countryside living on 3/4 of an acre on a rural highway, complete with a Model T-sized garage. At this point it's on the edge of save-able - we'll see. One other point, which I'll be writing about in more of a Dryden-specific context. I don't think telling people they need nodal development works AT ALL, even if you appeal to their better selves. My personal guess is that nodal development will happen on a large scale when the alternatives are visibly too expensive. Can we do things to move that direction? Sure. Can we say it should happen and see it happen? Not unless we control the price of gasoline. We'll see - I'm mildly optimistic today. Thanks, Simon _______________________________________________ RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: [email protected] http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org
