Making the Connection between Downtown Family Housing and a Sustainable City
The central areas of Austin, TX continue to transform with the addition of shopping districts, new office space, condominiums, and apartments. The city’s aim is to create more compact and walkable neighborhoods/areas in order to encourage healthier and more sustainable lifestyles among its residents through reduced car and land-use. It appears that there has been success as flocks of Austinites populate near these centers. But who are these Austinites? And what does this demographic shift mean for the sustainability goals of the city as a whole?
The factors driving who lives in these downtown areas are complex, but a primary consideration is housing. If we look at the housing available in the downtown area we encounter mainly high-rise condos and apartments; housing types suitable for singles or couples without children. A second consideration is the activities and programs prominent in these areas. There are several attractions for families such as farmers’ markets, the Austin’s Children’s Museum, and Zilker Park. However, with an abundance of bars and limited access to schools, families are discouraged from living in these more dense urban environments.
The consequence of excluding this demographic from central districts is that the households with the largest carbon footprint remain in suburban areas where they commute to work, school, and run errands by car. The negative environmental impacts of suburbanization are not remotely reduced as long as families remain in distant neighborhoods where larger houses and roadways consume more energy and land.
The towers of this image are exemplary of the several residential towers sprouting up in the downtown area.
The solution may not be to prioritize family housing in the densest of downtown areas, but may be to preserve single-family housing in targeted areas such as the Hyde Park Neighborhood; areas that are centralized, but quieter than entertainment districts. A consideration may be to increase amenities (schools, day cares, dry cleaners, grocers, etc.) in these existing, centralized neighborhoods.
An important question that remains is whether or not families want to live in denser, more urban environments? Do you have a family? What are your thoughts? Would you want to live in an urban environment and what would entice you?
Credits: Images and data linked to sources.
This entry was posted
on Friday, January 25th, 2013 at 9:35 am and is filed under Architecture, Bonnie Rodd, Community/Economic Development, Energy, Environmental Design, Housing, Infrastructure, Land Use, Social/Demographics, Urban Development/Real Estate, Urban Planning and Design.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
January 29th, 2013 at 12:17 am
I have a family of five. Three kids, 3, 8, and 11. We’d love to live in a city. I hate driving. I ride my bike to work every day but the kids have to be taken to school by car.
The schools in the neighborhoods that are denser are always really bad or they don’t exist (I’ve lived in Seattle and in San Francisco, downtowns don’t have any schools at all).
It’s unsafe for kids to walk to school. It’s unsafe for kids to play in the parks. Mainly because of cars, but also because they get picked on by other, more aggressive kids.
I am originally from Munich, Germany. My older brother still lives there. I used to walk to school as a kid and take the subway when I got older and went to high school. It is illegal there to drop your kids off by car. Everyone hast to walk. That’s what makes it safer for everyone. Since there are so many kids out walking, traffic is slower.
Every neighborhood has access to a park, since nobody has a backyard. Kids walk home from school by bakeries and pick up rolls. We used to walk to Christkindl markets in the wiinter. I really, really miss growing up in a big city, it seems so impossible here, so much would have to change.
January 31st, 2013 at 2:56 am
A neighborhood composed primarily of singles and couples is also much less stable than one composed of a mix of singles, couples, and families, or primarily families. Families invest in communities. They are homeowners, their children attend neighborhood schools, and they expect, when they purchase their home, to build a life around and within their community. Singles and couples are transient, and while some will volunteer or otherwise become involved in their community, many will be free-loaders, so to speak.
May 7th, 2013 at 10:35 am
Thank you for this insight! I think you make a great point that if everyone walks, or uses alternative modes of transportation, it is safer. Also, your experience sounds much more rich than the experience I had, and I am sure most Americans have, as a child. That is definitely the environment I hope children have here in the future.
May 7th, 2013 at 10:39 am
Fantastic point about the stability of a community. Families do make communities, and that is another reason why it is so important to bring them into cities.