Michael Mehaffy writes that there is growing research that paints a decidedly mixed picture on the benefits of tall buildings.
There are significant negative ecological impacts of tall buildings, as well as other negative factors, and the ecological benefits are not as great as is often assumed, says Mehaffy.
"Often cities like New York and Vancouver are cited as stellar examples of dense ecologically superior cities with tall buildings. It's usually assumed that it's the tall buildings in these cities that give them the edge.
These cities are indeed very positive when it comes to carbon and other ecological metrics. But it's often overlooked that tall buildings are only a fraction of all structures in these places, with the bulk of neighborhoods consisting of rowhouses, low-rise apartment buildings, and other much lower structures. They get their low-carbon advantages not from density per se, but from an optimum distribution of daily amenities, walkability and access to transit, and other efficiencies of urban form."
Thanks to Robert Steuteville
What We Really Mean When We Say Gentrification
The focus on gentrifying communities has, in many cases, eclipsed the similar problems facing more stagnant neighborhoods.
Study: Market-Rate Development Filters Into Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing
New research sheds new light on one of the most hotly debated questions in planning and development.
Why Tech-Utopian City Plans Fail
Like others before him, e-commerce billionaire Marc Lore wants to build the ideal city from scratch. Urban experts don't have much faith in his chances.
This six-course series explores essential urban design concepts using open source software and equips planners with the tools they need to participate fully in the urban design process.