Urban Sprawl: Which is best for the environment: single occupancy houses or high rise multi-occupancy flats?

Question

How do we stop urban sprawl?

Why do you think your option is better?

Answer 1

AGGRO URBANIZATION

what is best for the people is low buildings ,and with those we can combine environment so subsequently is best for both.

To stop Urban sprawl means to stop people breeding and good luck on that one and occupying existing buildings instead of building new ones ,and promote country living making it more attractive and practical to stop people from moving to the cities.

High rise building have bad psychological effects on people .
They did tests with rats and it showed that after ten levels they began to eat their young and even each other .Because they went mad.

Also air gets polluted ,makes you think of the mental conditions of the bosses who sit in the penthouses.

Single occupancy house of 3 floors is the ideal hight ,or 3 story apartments ,if all are the same hight and have flat roofs ,a complex farming situation or even nature can be build on top, connecting the roofs with bridges.

William McDonough is an architect who designed a brilliant city underneath the landscape,of just this ,all the rooms get the sun at least once a day ,the city produces its own power recycles its own wastes and utilizes it

and the landscape on top produces all the food ,(vegetables and meat )
this is a brilliant example of Aggro urbanization.
see this youtube the city is at the end
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoRjz8iTVoo

IN THE PAST
having gardens mixed with cities is not a new idea

Montezuma looked out of his window one day and saw all his peasants in huts of adobe as a blemish on his panorama ,and he ordered the people to hide themselves beneath beautiful flowers (deodorant was not so big in those days),

And so the central Americans were motivated to build living roofs ,turning their village in to a garden with themselves hidden with in .So the idea is by no means original

Babylon was doing very similar things using sophisticated building methods and stone.

TODAY

But today in the cities it is not recommended to grow food.
Because you will end up with cabbages that are contaminated by the city smog.
But to have ornamentals is a great way to liven up the place and combat the diminishings of Nature.

SUBURBS
However in the suburbs is another story ,Aggro urbanization would be a beautiful concept to counteract deforestation ,rising food prices,and a lot more.

It means slightly different construction with concrete roofs at a very gentle slope (for drainage)
damp coursing the concrete with black plastic,(Although the Aztecs used moss)
Installing irrigation systems.and leaving easy ways up to the roof ,with ramps

The walls and reinforced corner pillars must be of sufficient strength to support the extra weight ,as should the cross beams under the roof .

If you decide to go the full living roof way
which means at least 1/4 of a meter of soil to support the weight of the wet soil.
No more than 3 stories is recommended for doing the living roof .

Have the slope in a Northern direction to make full use of the sun(depending which hemisphere you are in,,and so that you could also incorporate solar panels.

To just have some flowers up there as is usual in Holland
But you can also put up lots of flowerpots ,standing on planks (the simple small way).


Permaculture has a lot to say about living roofs
as they are very common in desert environments in Australia.
------------------------------...
PERMACULTURE

It is a collection of sustainable ideas from around the world coupled to present level of knowledge
ideally suited for those who want to get back to the country and build a self sufficient situation for themselves and the family or a community .

People plant rather for the quality of life and to feed their families, than for the market ,so the motivation and the manner are totally different from ordinary agriculture .

Although the basic concept of Permaculture also applies to Organic and sustainable farming,

Utilizing soil management ,and mulching
Building soil instead of diminishing it

The Permaculture designers manual by Bill Mollison,which cost about 40 dollars.
and is the best all round book you can get,on Environmental design,.(tagiari publishing, [e-mail])

This book also has many gardening tips,bio-gas,companion planting and ideas for structures ,how to cool down houses in hot climates ,how to warm up houses in cold climates with out using technology but rather by design.

There are more answers on Permaculture
in my blog on this 360
http://360.yahoo.com/profile-XWsshpgjeb.1bYPvoqTx9oM-

Answer 2

I think that we need to put a world wide limit on the number of children people can have. Once a female has given birth to two children, she should be sterilized. As with men, once a man has fathered two children, he should be sterilized.

As far as housing, I like the idea of living with the least you can have to survive. Perhaps we can start building REALLY small houses, and the size home you get depends on your family situation.
We also need to start looking at turning EXISTING high rise office buildings or other older abandoned buildings and turning them into living space. There must be 50 abandoned buidings in my city that can be refurbished and used as living space, not to mention the 100+ empty homes throughout the city. People would rather go out and tear down trees in the country and build a brand new house, then take half of that money and refurbish an older home in the city.
I grew up in a rural area but now live in a small city (50,000 people), and I have to say that I am greatly bothered by the fact that every time I go back to the rural area to visit my parents, more trees are gone and something new is being built. There are woods behind my parent's house that used to be so full of trees that it was dark and spooky to walk through them during the day. Now, there is a housing development there, with $500,000 homes on quarter acre parcels, and they're planting a few ornamental trees to replace the thousands of 200+ year old natural trees that they cut down. Its sickening. In the last year, the town has put up 4 banks, 3 pharmacies, a Starbucks, a gas station, and a restaurant in places where there were only trees before.

How do we stop it? I don't think we can. As individuals, the only way I see stopping urban sprawl is (now, don't say I'm crazy...) to win the lottery and buy up as much land as possible with our winnings.

Answer 3

The best for the environment in any given town or city would be single occupancy houses. It keeps the population down and it's easier to control many factors influencing the environment. On the other hand, to help control urban sprawl the only way is to go up like in high rise. We all see this in any large city. When space is at a premium we have to go to high rise multi-occupancy flats, we just don't have any better choices. We can't stop people from moving to the city of their choice. If we could we would limit the population in cities to help protect the enviornment.

Answer 4

that depends, firstly, why do we need residential high rises? scarcity of land? there's demand for it? economically, if we were living in hong kong or singapore, where land area is very limited, we are left with not much option but to stay in these high rises.
with high rises, there's not much u can do to enjoy the environment, limited area for gardening, etc. communal spaces are important for interaction between occupants in high rises.
as for single occupancy houses, there's usually a communal area, such as park and their facilities and amenities for a particular area- green space/ belt.

both have their own pros and cons in many aspects, but personally, i would prefer a single occupancy housing scheme.

we cant really stop the urban sprawl as it will keep on expanding, areas will expand and encroach city centres and will create new townships near the cities. however with proper planning by the local authorities planners is vital to ensure the city functions well without any congestion and other problems.

Answer 5

High rise multi-occupancy flats are better than the first one because many people can live in same flats and this decrease fast of the urban sprawl.On the other hand,if all those have their houses this makes urban sprawl faster.but this won't be helpful if population increasing does not slow down.

Answer 6

Either answer will not be good.
As we all know population is growing more and more as time goes on, look back 20 years ago, to how many people have become on this planet.
If we disperse and sprawl out all over the country we loose land that is producing our foods.
If we live in high rise apartment buildings, there is congestion of people. High rise occupancy, I as well then wonder how will it affect our weather patterns, the strain on our earth of having these huge buildings arising out of the earth to the heavens.
I just moved out of the city back to the country, freedom of space and fresh air is wonderful.
All in all, city can go sky high as where can they go? Sprawling around the country in single houses to me would be the better way to go. this would be my vote on this thought.

Answer 7

It all depends on your perspective... and I for one think both options are good and bad in thier own ways...

Single occupancy residences are good in that they have less of a visual impact on the landscape and visual environment... so have less of an impact there. They also mean that fewer people can occupy any one land area (obviously, fewer storeys means fewer people), so with fewer people in that area, there will be less demand for electricity, water, sewage... so again, less impact in the physical environment... not to mention less polution from cars so probably better health in general.

However, it is a big waste of land... and in a world where people need accomodation, the space could be better used. Also, as the costs generally relate to the AREA of land being occupied, if ther are less residents, then you have to split the costs between fewer people... so rent is higher and house prices also higher. This in itself will exclude lower income people and attract higher income folks... who historically have more impact on the environment with thier bigger cars and fancier lifestyles.

High rise flats of course have a massive impact on the surrounding area... they look out of place in many regions and can destroy an area of natural beauty. Again, becasue more people live thier, there is a chance that there will be more polution and environmental impact also.

Of course the flip side of this coin is that they use the space better.

To answer your question about how to stop urban sprawl, obviously, building UP instead of OUT is the best way to prevent it... so high rise is a good option... but is it better to stop urban sprawl at the expense of the local area and environment?

I think we need to find a middle ground... buildings that blend in... are not too high... but still give a good ratio of people per square metre.

Sadly you can't get something for nothing...

Answer 8

Condos are the worst; I think single story dwelling are the better option of the two. Bobe has the right idea.