
It’s no secret that cities are better for the environment than suburbs. Here’s a passage from Anthony Flint’s 2009 book Wrestling With Moses:
Cities are also increasingly seen as an answer to the challenge of climate change. They are dense and have transit; if their buildings can become more energy efficient, they represent the potential for the greenest form of human settlement, and compared with suburban sprawl can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Manhattanites, on a per capita basis, consume less energy than anywhere else in the country.
Building up instead of out is more costly in the short-term but on a long-term basis it is more efficient. I’m still amazed at how many people think of cities as nothing more than wretched hives of scum and villainy. Don’t take my word for it, listen to David Owen. If you haven’t read his outstanding book Green Metropolis, I hope you’ll add it to your reading list.
Another good reference is an article in the March, 2011, issue of The Atlantic: How Skyscrapers Can Save the City (excerpted from Edward Glaeser’s book Triumph of the City). It gives a brief history of skyscrapers and describes how important they are to urban development. For the hyper-efficient, here is the bottom line:
Consider that carbon emissions are significantly lower in big cities than in outlying suburbs, and that, as of 2007, life expectancy in New York City was 1.5 years higher than in the nation as a whole. As America struggles to regain its economic footing, we would do well to remember that dense cities are also far more productive than suburbs, and offer better-paying jobs. Globalization and new technologies seem to have only made urban proximity more valuable—young workers gain many of the skills they need in a competitive global marketplace by watching the people around them. Those tall buildings enable the human interactions that are at the heart of economic innovation, and of progress itself.
Of course, skyscrapers aren’t the only way to improve density, but they are part of an integrated solution. A durable local economy needs diversity; the Tampa Bay Area needs more tall buildings, and we need more of them to include retail, office space, and affordable residential space. So here are two photos looking up at one of Tampa’s few tall office buildings, 100 North Tampa, better known as the Regions Bank Building. Check the Category Cloud at the bottom of the page for a few more images of Tampa’s tallest building.
