John Petro
The City, Your Mental Health, and Green Spaces

Meridian Hill Park, Washington, D.C.
Here's an interesting story from the Boston Globe on the effect of urban environments on the brain. After reading it, one can come away with one of two different impressions: 1) incorporating parks and green space in the city is important or, 2) cities are unnatural and harmful places that should be avoided.
As for the latter impression, the author calls cities "deeply unnatural." But cities are no more unnatural than birds nests, ant hills, or the burrows of groundhogs; like an ant hill, a city is the built environment of natural beings, i.e. humans.
I prefer to come away with the first impression: that incorporating parks and trees into neighborhoods is good urban design. That's why New York City Mayor Bloomberg's goal to create a new park or plaza in every neighborhood is laudable. The communities of Sunset Park and Red Hook in Brooklyn are seriously deprived of green space. According to the community group UPROSE:
"The community has less than 1/4 of an acre of open space for every 1000 people. The New York City Standard is 2.5 acres, which is one of the lowest metropolitan standards in the United States. Most cities require 6 to 10 acres per 1000 people."
Efforts to plant street trees are also important, but are also very costly and difficult to implement successfully. This article from the Washington Post discusses the numerous "Million Tree" planting projects in different US cities. It is estimated that it costs $1,000 to plant a new tree and in Manhattan. And this New York Times article describes some of the challenges involved in planting trees in an urban environment.
"Sometimes the residents or homeowners are worried about their allergies (though the trees are intended to help alleviate asthma and allergy rates citywide); sometimes they’re worried that a branch will fall on their car (a call to 311 will procure a free pruning). Sometimes they’re worried about the extensive construction required to plant a tree in a patch of concrete... For [New York City Department of Parks and Recreation forester] Mr. Simpson, it was an education in New York thinking. 'It’s O.K. if we ask for it, but you can’t tell us we have to have it,' he summarized."
But getting back to the importance of parks and trees as good urban design: we must also remember that the desire to increase the amount of greenspace led first to the Garden City movement and then the "Radiant City" type designs of Le Corbusier and others. These movements advocated for "tower in a park" designs during the "urban renewal" era of city planning. These developments, commonly found in housing projects but also found in high-end residential and commercial developments, destroyed the street grid and strangled street life, leading to spookily desolate urban environments.

John Petro: Author Bio | Other Posts
Posted at 10:46 AM, Jan 07, 2009 in Urban Affairs
Permalink | Email to Friend | Comments (4)











Comments
Hi i am regular visitor to your website !..........
I am amazed with your services...........
I really happy with your blog.........
Please continue your blog services ....You are very great DMI blog ....This will be opportunity for new visitor to post their feedback !!!!!!!!!Keep it up !!!!!!!!!
please continue your services!!!!!!!!
______________
lorrie
Cash Surveys
Posted by: Cash Surveys | March 2, 2009 04:38 AM
The duality of impressions (good urban design v. anti city) are more complementary than anything else. Part of the reason towers were put up (for the wealthy) was to avoid the dirty streets, and the people that inhabit(ed) those streets. (likewise, housing tower construction concentrated many perceived as undesirable away from neighs for those with more social/financial capital, etc.) No doubt space plays a role in mental health, particularly when it is so hard to get to, or prohibitively expensive. The question for me is whether we can actually put a porous street-scape back together again with auto-dominance the way it is. J. Jacobs was pretty cool in recognizing the need for mixed-use public space, and that's probably a good idea to beat out the desolation; still, the regulation of open space in the city plays both ways: to allow the spaces to be used while taking away some people from them... not sure which will win out.
Posted by: justin | March 4, 2009 04:02 PM
I personally love urban agriculture. It adds a whole new dimension to a city space and allows for a prettier landscape as well as innovative solutions to the tough agricultural questions of our time. On a nerdier note, green architecture is just really, really cool! I hope people start placing more significance on a localized green movement. I found an interesting thread about the necessity of such change at Pandalous. It can be found at
http://www.pandalous.com/nodes/gardening_for_justice
Posted by: Sarah | June 14, 2009 05:33 PM
I personally love urban agriculture. I think it beautifies a city and I can readily accept that it can help sustain both a physical landscape as well as a mental one. I'm hugely supportive of the growing needs for a localized green movement and I sincerely hope that more green spaces pop up everywhere. They are absolutely great answers to some of our environmental issues and they are just cool looking! I found an interesting thread on pandalous about the growing need for a local green movement. It can be found here at
http://www.pandalous.com/nodes/gardening_for_justice
Posted by: Sarah | June 14, 2009 05:36 PM