I don’t believe the use of land to shelter
increasing population activity has been seriously considered a threat to our
survival. If it has at some intellectual level, the concern has not been
converted to a definition of sustainable geographic limits for cities that protect
agriculture and the Natural Domain. We continue to rely on unlimited annexation
to expand the land area needed to shelter the activities of increasing
populations, and this continues to consume our source of life with sprawl.
The law of limits for all other
species is a simple equation related to the land available. We are no different,
but have considered land as property and a convertible commodity without limit.
Part of this attitude, I believe, is due to our incredibly small individual presence
on the planet; hubris that fails to recognize our parasitic behavior; and an
inability to lead shelter capacity decisions with the abstract comprehension,
measurement, prediction, and evaluation required. We represent microscopic
activity expanding in a petri dish being observed by a universe that will not
intervene to diagnose and treat behavior that exceeds the planet’s law of
limits. We are expected to recognize the obligation.
There is no question in my mind that
there is a power beyond our comprehension, but I don’t believe it exists to
save us from ourselves. We have been given guidance, permitted choice, and are expected
to make the right decisions.
In the case of shelter for the
activities of growing populations, it is one of four divisions in the Urban and
Rural Phyla of a Built Domain that is in competition with our source
of life - the Natural Domain. The other three divisions serve the Shelter
Division and provide the movement, open space, and life support infrastructure
it needs to survive.
The path we follow in our cities will
depend on our ability to build knowledge that can lead us away from unlimited
sprawl. This direction will not be provided by divine guidance. We must acquire
the knowledge needed to define direction and correlate the many professions
that must contribute. Until then, we seem to have concluded that we can rely on
citizen participation for decisions. I hope to show in this essay that this
participation cannot command the detail required to plan the strategy needed
for leadership. The goal is rather self-evident. We must learn to shelter the
activities of growing populations within a geographically limited Built Doman
designed to protect their quality and source of life – the Natural Domain.
I have mentioned this topic in many
essays. At its heart has been a conviction that we do not have the city design
language needed to step beyond conflict over opinion with the measurement,
evaluation, and prediction needed to build knowledge, gain credibility, and
introduce restraint within a political environment that does not recognize the
issue as one of survival. The protection of health, safety, and welfare has helped
us to survive. It has overlooked the implications of unlimited growth and
consumption on a planet that is no longer a “land without end”.
Our course can be adjusted by
classifying building design categories in a way that permits us to accurately measure
and predict the shelter capacity of land and the intensity these options imply.
This is relevant because the combination of gross building area and activity on
a given land area produces shelter capacity, intensity, and economic
productivity per buildable acre. It may take a minute to digest this, but may
come into focus when I point out that gross building can be occupied by any
activity. Compatibility of activity has been a city planning concern, but the
quantity of activity and its revenue potential per square foot and per buildable
acre has been a mystery that determines a city’s financial stability. In other
words, a land use activity plan without a correlated gross building area and
condition plan will struggle to define a stable financial strategy over time.
It will be forced to fight endless tactical battles over project proposals with
only a vague understanding of the role they will play in a comprehensive
financial strategy. Calculated correlation of these relationships on every lot
within a city’s land use plan will indicate its current economic stability,
quality of life, and future course of action; since the average annual revenue
received per buildable acre in a city should equal its average annual cost per
acre to provide essential services. If the imbalance is great enough, the
debate over the definition of “essential” begins as budget cuts become an
issue.
I should also mention that excessive
gross building area on a given land area produces excessive intensity.
Intensity seeking to magnify profit has been a term without a definition and
source of frequent conflict. Floor quantity is only one of many design
specification topics that combine to form intensity. Those who have read some
of my previous essays have read about these topics and the correlation involved.
I won’t repeat myself here for the sake of brevity. I’ll simply mention that
intensity is a function of shelter capacity and can now be measured. The
relationship of intensity to gross building area and activity determines the
revenue potential of a given land area, and the physical dominance introduced within
the urban pattern we inhabit.
The objective is to accurately predict
gross building area and intensity options for a given land area based on the
design specification decisions entered in a building category’s forecast model.
This definition is not only useful for prediction. The specification topics can
also be measured at existing locations to benchmark a host of related observations
and evaluations from many professional perspectives. I think we may agree that
measurement can lead to knowledge.
I would like to introduce the entire
list of building design categories, activity groups, and master equations I
have proposed. It is included on three pages as Table 1. I am not including the
digital templates that permit a set of design specifications for a building
design category to be evaluated with a few keystrokes. They are beyond the
scope of this limited format. I hope you get acquainted, since the cellular
structure of a city currently represents the anatomy of a parasite that does
not understand the discipline required to survive.
The master equations referenced in
Table 1 have been included to show they exist. I have not included explanations
for the abbreviations shown and derivations involved. My primary objective has
been to present the classification needed to proceed with the evaluation of
design specification decisions and shelter capacity implications.
POSTSCRIPT
Economic development will continue to
struggle until it can accurately correlate shelter capacity with activity,
intensity, and revenue on every lot in a city. At this point it can begin to
understand the current and future potential of the land involved. This is when
strategic discussions can begin with the information needed. Until then, cities
will continue their annual dance with deficits and city design opinion will
continue seeking a stronger foundation.
Walter M. Hosack: July, 2023
