Some experts in the study say the U.S. could reduce emissions by up to 11% in the next 40 years - just by building housing closer together. (Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
When the Senate picks up debate on
the climate change bill, we’re sure to
hear a lot about how power plants and
cars are contributing to the problem.
But a new study finds that we should
also be considering where we live. Julie
Grant reports that living in the suburbs
can create extra carbon emissions:
Transcript
When the Senate picks up debate on
the climate change bill, we’re sure to
hear a lot about how power plants and
cars are contributing to the problem.
But a new study finds that we should
also be considering where we live. Julie
Grant reports that living in the suburbs
can create extra carbon emissions:
Most Americans live in or near big cities – but those in the suburbs have to drive a lot.
The National Research Council completed a study for Congress. It finds that building housing closer together near urban centers could reduce the amount people drive. That would save energy and cut greenhouse gas emissions.
Marlon Boarnet is a professor at the University of California, Irvine. He was on the study committee.
“The best evidence out there leads us to believe that people who live in more dense development do in fact drive less. And we feel that the evidence can conclude that that’s a causal relationship.”
Even if single-family homes were built closer together, it would mean less greenhouse gases.
Some experts in the study say the U.S. could reduce emissions by up to 11% in the next 40 years – just by building housing closer together.
Mayor Jay Williams says that about ten years ago, they started holding community meetings to figure out how to make Youngstown run better for its smaller population. (Photo courtesy of Youngstown 2010)
Folks in lots of rust-belt cities
are used to hearing about the declining
population. Over the past thirty years,
people have been moving away from
cities such as Cleveland, Detroit,
and Indianapolis. Julie Grant visited
one city that’s embracing its newfound
smallness – and trying to un-build some
of its neighborhoods:
Transcript
Folks in lots of rust-belt cities
are used to hearing about the declining
population. Over the past thirty years,
people have been moving away from
cities such as Cleveland, Detroit,
and Indianapolis. Julie Grant visited
one city that’s embracing its newfound
smallness – and trying to un-build some
of its neighborhoods:
For decades, Youngstown, Ohio has been a city looking to its past. It was booming in the 1950s. The steel industry brought good paying, reliable jobs. City leaders back then planned for the population to blossom above 200,000.
It never got there. The steel mills closed, and people left. Youngstown lost a lot of people.
Mayor Jay Williams says that about ten years ago, they started holding community meetings. They wanted to figure out how to make the city run better for the 80,000 people who are still here.
“While it was an acknowledgement of the fact that we were going to be a smaller city, it also was an understanding that smaller didn’t have to be inferior. And that started a series of things that led us to where we are today.”
Now they are in the process of demolishing 2,000 abandoned homes and other buildings. They actually want the people to leave some areas – so the city doesn’t have to spend money on things like power, utilities and snow plows on those streets.
Mayor Williams says, in some neighborhoods, there are entire blocks that are abandoned, except for one or two houses.
“So from that standpoint, we do have a moral, and an ethical and legal obligation as a city to provide certain services. But what we’re trying to do is balance that with the fact that sometimes it doesn’t make economical or business sense.”
A lot of the times those holdouts are older folks, who don’t want to move – and might not accept that the city doesn’t plan to return to its former glory. The new leaders want to embrace the city’s new small-ness – and improve the quality.
Thing is, most of the leaders in Youngstown today are – young. The mayor is 37, the Congressman is 36, and Community Organizer Phil Kidd just turned 30. Kidd says his generation doesn’t really remember those glory days of the steel mills.
“So we don’t remember how things used to be. We’re not bitter about what happened. We are here by choice in Youngstown as young people. And when you bring that to the table, there’s a different type of lens in which you look at Youngstown, I think.”
Kidd says his generation can see that the infrastructure needs to be the right size for the people who live here now.
He says making the necessary changes will open up all kinds of new opportunities for Youngstown.
“And we look at it as almost a blank canvas, in a way, to really be progressive about being as kind of new urban pioneers, in a certain regard. But with respect for the history for this community.”
And that new vision is inadvertently attracting some young people back to the city.
Maggie Pence grew up in Youngstown, and like a lot of people, moved away after college. She needed a job. And some hope for a bright future.
“When I left, I thought, ‘this is just, nothing’s ever going to change.’ It’s always going to be lamenting the steel mills, waiting for the next big savior. It was the waiting, just waiting, to see what was going to happen.”
Today, Pence is swinging her 11-month old daughter at a park just north of downtown Youngstown. She and her husband are renovating what was a boarded up, foreclosed house nearby.
Pence largely credits city leaders for her decision. When she saw their plan, called Youngstown 2010, she decided it was time to move her family back from Brooklyn, New York, to Youngstown.
“Yeah, I mean, seeing 2010 and seeing what they were doing and having make sense to me made me realize that you could come home again, kind-of. I mean, okay, there’s a future.”
The city isn’t sure exactly what it’s going to do with all the new open space – once all the abandoned houses are demolished. Some people are planting trees and neighborhood gardens. Community leaders say the people who live here will have to decide what they want the new city to look like.
A lot of shrinking cities in the Rust Belt will have to figure that out. Sooner or later, shrinking tax bases won’t support all those barely used streets, sidewalks and water lines.
42% of the greenhouse gas emissions in the US are related to everything that goes into creating the food and products we use, and then throw away. (Photo courtesy of the National Cancer Institute)
More than 100 world leaders are
in New York today talking about
climate change at The United Nations.
A new report from the U-S Environmental
Protection agency says a big chunk of
greenhouse gas emissions can be pinned
on how we use land and resources.
Tamara Keith has more:
Transcript
More than 100 world leaders are
in New York today talking about
climate change at The United Nations.
A new report from the U-S Environmental
Protection agency says a big chunk of
greenhouse gas emissions can be pinned
on how we use land and resources.
Tamara Keith has more:
Some EPA scientists say greenhouse gas emissions are not just about tailpipes and smokestacks. They say you have to look at the big picture.
42% of the greenhouse gas emissions in the US are related to everything that goes into creating the food and products we use, and then throw away. So, they say more reduce, reuse and recycle. And, a lot of emissions are caused by urban sprawl. We have to drive everywhere.
Brigit Lowery is with the EPA. She says there are ways to reduce those emissions too.
“Encouraging compact development, such as promoting smart growth. But also reducing development pressures on green space, such as redeveloping formerly contaminated properties.”
Lowery said she knew going into it that land use and resource management contributed to climate change. But she was surprised by how much.
This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution. (Graph courtesy of NASA and NOAA)
The Environmental Protection Agency
is trying to figure out how it might
regulate greenhouse gases. Lester
Graham reports language in the
Clean Air Act is not helping:
Transcript
The Environmental Protection Agency
is trying to figure out how it might
regulate greenhouse gases. Lester
Graham reports language in the
Clean Air Act is not helping:
The U.S. Supreme Court ordered the EPA to decide whether greenhouse gases are pollutants. The EPA is making the case that they are.
But setting rules to reduce those emissions is problematic.
The Clean Air Act says it you emit 250-tons a year of a pollutant, you need a pollution permit. 250-tons of CO2 a year is not a lot.
Jeff Holmstead worked in the EPA on air pollution issues during the last Bush Administration. Now, he’s a lawyer with the Washington DC firm Bracewell and Giuliani.
“You know, 250-tons of CO2 according to EPA would include most schools, most apartment buildings, any kind of commercial building. It just isn’t possible to develop permits for all of these sources.”
So the EPA plans to raise the amount to 25,000-tons. But, that’s not what the Clean Air Act says.
That’s one reason why the Obama Administration prefers a climate change law passed by Congress.
Several states are studying how the material holds up for asphalt roads, but for now most of the singles are mixed in asphalt used for parking lots.
(Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
It’s estimated, every year, somewhere
between seven and eleven-million tons
of old asphalt shingles end up in landfills.
Some states are short on landfill space.
Lester Graham reports, they’re now
encouraging grinding up and recycling
the old shingles:
Transcript
It’s estimated, every year, somewhere
between seven and eleven-million tons
of old asphalt shingles end up in landfills.
Some states are short on landfill space.
Lester Graham reports, they’re now
encouraging grinding up and recycling
the old shingles:
Two-thirds of American homes have asphalt shingle roofs. They last twelve to twenty years before they need to be replaced.
Since most of the material in asphalt shingles is the same stuff used in asphalt pavement, that’s where they’re going.
(sound of machinery)
New businesses are popping up across the nation that take the shingles.
Chris Edwards is co-owner of Ideal Recycling in Southfield, Michigan. He says roofers can dump old shingles at his place cheaper than taking it to the landfill.
“And then they can also sell it to their customers that they are recycling and it’s green. So it does help the contractors quite a bit.”
Several states are studying how the material holds up for asphalt roads, but for now most of the singles are mixed in asphalt used for parking lots.
Rudy Wilfong, on the left, distributes Coroma toilets. Matt Grocoff, right, is with Greenovation TV. (Photo by Thore Bergman)
Matt and Lester tested the flushing capabilities of several low-flow toilets by using potatoes, tennis balls, and rubber duckies. (Photo by Thore Bergman)
A vision in green. An 8-gallon tank toilet from the 1950s in avocado. (Photo courtesy of Greenovation TV)
The Environmental Protection Agency has
a new water saving program called Water
Sense. It’s similar to the Energy Star label
for electronics. To get the Water Sense
program’s endorsement, toilets must use less
water. But, people have been complaining
about the old style low-flow toilets since they
were first required in the mid-1990s. Lester
Graham reports on what’s changed since then:
Transcript
The Environmental Protection Agency has
a new water saving program called Water
Sense. It’s similar to the Energy Star label
for electronics. To get the Water Sense
program’s endorsement, toilets must use less
water. But, people have been complaining
about the old style low-flow toilets since they
were first required in the mid-1990s. Lester
Graham reports on what’s changed since then:
The problem with those old low-flow toilets is the companies didn’t really re-design them – they just made the tank smaller. Some of them just didn’t do the job.
Hugh Maquire has one in his home. He’s had a bad experience with his.
Maquire: “I had to flush my low-flow toilet six or seven times. What is that saving you?”
Graham: “ Doesn’t save you much water that way does it?”
Maquire Doesn’t save you much water at all. Plus it’s annoying. It’s embarrassing, ‘cause everybody’s hearing you flush the toilet six or seven times, wondering what the heck’s going on in there.”
So, we asked Matt Grocoff with Greenovation TV to set up a demonstration for us. Behind the Bgreen Retail Store in Ann Arbor, Michigan three different models of these new Water Sense low flow toilets are set up on five-gallon buckets so we can see what gets flushed… and what comes out.
Grocoff: “I always joke there were three things that set back the environmental movement: there was the original low-flow shower head, the original low-flush toilet and Jimmy Carter’s sweater. ‘Cause what that said to everybody was ‘You’re going to pay more for it; it was going to be less comfortable and you were going to have to sacrifice and it wasn’t going to perform as well.’ And with these new generations of redesigned toilets, you’re getting a higher quality product than even the existing one-point-six gallon or even a three gallon per flush toilet”
Graham: “Let’s see it.”
These toilets all have dual flush capabilities. A full flush is 1.28 gallons. A half flush – just 0.8. To prove how well they work, he’s just using the point-eight gallon flush. Matt’s got tennis balls, potatoes, and little rubber duckies.
Grocoff: “We got three duckies.” (flush sound)
Graham: “ Well, that seemed to work. No duckies. What’d you think of that, Hugh?”
Maquire: “I felt sorry for that ducky, but it was a great demonstration.”
And, again, that was the half-flush at 0.8 gallons, half of what the old low-flow standard was. Matt upped the ante.
Grocoff: “Two tennis balls and two potatoes. This is going to be the real challenge.” (flush sound)
Then more potatoes.
(flush)
And more duckies.
(flush)
Now, Matt’s demonstration is hardly scientific, but of the three brands we tested – a Kohler, a Toto and a Coroma – it appeared to me the Coroma worked best, at flushing duckies and potatoes anyway.
Rudy Wilfong is a dealer for Coroma. The toilet is made in Australia. He says Australia has had one-gallon-per-flush restrictions for 30 years, so they’ve designed them to work.
Wilfong: “And they don’t plug. They flush better than the 1.6 gallon toilets with half the water.”
And compared to the old low-flow toilets, you can expect to save about 1,000 gallons, per person, per year. They do cost more, but the pay back compared to a regular low-flow is about 2 to 2.5 years. If you’ve got one of those three-gallon-per-flush models, or even an old 6 gallon model, your payback will be a lot faster.
Graham: “Alright, Matt, I’m going to give you one more chance to impress me. What have you got here?”
Grocoff: “Alright. So, here we’ve got a full t-shirt. (flush) Very nice.”
Maquire: “Hey, Matt. I had a black t-shirt. Do you see it anywhere?” (laugh)
Graham: “Well, this was pretty impressive. Where can I get some more information about this?”
Grocoff: “Of course, you can go to Greenovation-dot-TV and you can see a video and some photographs of some of these toilets.”
Graham: “ Alright. Matt Grocoff of Greenovation-dot-TV. Thanks very much.”
A fan is sized to the front door so they can de-pressurize the house. This helps them see where air is escaping - and where insulation may be needed. (Photo by Julie Grant)
The water heater shows evidence of carbon monoxide. (Photo by Julie Grant)
An inspector checks the efficiency of the furnace. (Photo by Julie Grant)
The government stimulus package
included billions of new dollars
for home weatherization programs.
The money is used to help low income
folks make their homes more energy
efficient. But some critics say
it’s not a good use of federal tax
dollars. Julie Grant reports:
Transcript
The government stimulus package included billions of new dollars for home weatherization programs. The money is used to help low income folks make their homes more energy efficient. But some critics say it’s not a good use of federal tax dollars. Julie Grant reports:
Chris Graham spends his days checking the energy efficiency of people’s homes.
Today he’s at Sandra Richards’ in Mogodore, Ohio.
Graham: “Hi Sandra.”
Sandra: “How are ya?”
Graham: “Wonderful. And you?”
Sandra: “Better.”
Graham: “Better?”
Sandra is 55. Her house is clean and neat. She was a nurse for many years, but today she’s sitting on the couch, watching TV. A broken foot spiraled into problems with her knee and hip – and other health problems.
“I mean I’ve just had so many things go on in such a little time. I was working 12 hour days, and one month later, I couldn’t work at all.”
Sandra qualified for the home weatherization program because she doesn’t have much in the way of income anymore.
Chris Graham says he’s been to a lot of homes where people are far worse off. They can’t get around, they don’t have money coming in, and their houses get cold in the winter.
Graham heads to the basement.
“The first thing we have to make sure is that the heating unit is not in terrible, dilapidated shape. And that it does not have more than a specified amount of carbon monoxide in the flu gasses.”
He turns on the furnace and sticks a probe into the flu pipe.
(sound of a tester)
Grant: “Looks like a receipt came out.”
Graham: “It kind of is. It tells you exactly what was going on there.”
Looks like Sandra’s furnace is running pretty well. 81% efficiency.
But Graham sees evidence of carbon monoxide on her old water heater.
“It’s 17 years old and it just plain needs changed. It’s got burnt, scorch all over it. So we’re gonna do that.”
That could cost more than $1,000.
But the home weatherization program can afford it these days. The stimulus packaged included $5-billion for this kind of work – compared with less than a quarter of a billion dollars last year. The new money has to be spent within two years.
And some people think that’s just too much money – too fast. Leslie Paige is with a taxpayer watchdog group called Citizens Against Government Waste.
“There’s always a lot of waste in government spending anyway, but when you spend it quickly and there’s very little oversight, that’s almost a prescription for seeing a lot of that money go for waste and fraud and losing to abuse.”
That kind of criticism is shocking to David Shea. He’s director the Community Action Council of Portage County, Ohio – the organization that hires inspector Chris Graham.
The weatherization program has been around since 1976 and Shea says they have to report their spending in about a hundred different ways.
“It’s not like money is being thrown out at agencies and just say, ‘oh go out and do it.’ There are volumes and volumes of written regulations that have been around for a long time. We do so much sophisticated reporting; they know how every dollar is being spent. Always. Always.”
Shea’s office used to have one crew out weatherizing homes around the county. Since the stimulus money’s come in, he’s hired a second crew. But there are so many people wanting their services, the waiting list is still years long.
(sound of a fan)
Back at Sandra Richards’ house, inspector Chris Graham has sized a big fan into the front door. He’s depressurizing the house – so he can see where air is escaping. Graham says she’s going to need some doors sealed and new insulation in the attic.
He says Sandra will feel more comfortable, so she won’t need to turn up the heat in the winter. That means she’ll save on energy costs, and will use less fossil fuels.
That’s the whole idea of this project – to use less energy in the future, and to help millions of families that couldn’t afford to improve things on their own.
After Carrie Zaenglein lost her home to a fire, she decided to build her dream home - made from straw. (Photo by Joyce Kryszak)
Dave Lanfear is building a company devoted to straw bale house construction. Straw bale homes are popular in the Southwest, but not in other areas of the U.S. (Photo by Joyce Kryszak)
Lanfear fills the wood frame with tightly packed straw bales. Next, the walls are coated inside and out with layers of clay plaster. (Photo by Joyce Kryszak)
The clay plaster on the walls seals out moisture but still allows the walls to breathe. That prevents mold and keeps the house sound. The house also gets high marks for fire safety. (Photo by Joyce Kryszak)
The big bad wolf gave straw houses a pretty bad reputation.
But it turns out straw bale houses are incredibly strong and
energy efficient. The century-old building material is making
a comeback as an eco-friendly choice for modern home
construction. And these homeowners aren’t afraid of a little
wind. One woman is even building a straw bale house in the
sometimes cold, blustery climate of the east. Joyce Kryszak
tells us her story:
Transcript
The big bad wolf gave straw houses a pretty bad reputation. But it turns out straw bale houses are incredibly strong and energy efficient. The century-old building material is making a comeback as an eco-friendly choice for modern home construction. And these homeowners aren’t afraid of a little wind. One woman is even building a straw bale house in the sometimes cold, blustery climate of the east. Joyce Kryszak tells us her story:
This does kind of start out like a fairy tale. On the edge of the industrial city of Buffalo, New York there’s an ordinary little village. It’s dotted with aging, modest houses.
Carrie Zaenglein used to live here. That is until she lost her village home to fire two years ago. But that didn’t frighten the quiet-spoken young woman away. Zainglein says it just gave her a chance to rebuild. Only this time she’s building her dream home out of straw.
“I’ve always been interested in green building and doing things the environmentally friendly way, so I figured while I had a chance to start over I would do it the way I wanted to do it,” said Zainglein.
But how to go about it? You see, straw bale houses are growing more popular in the southwest. But you won’t find straw house builders listed in the yellow pages of most eastern cities.
So, Zainglein did a little searching on the web and found Dave Lanfear. Turns out, he’s building a company devoted to straw bale house construction. And Lanfear doesn’t care how much he’s teased about it.
“Yeah, I hear the same kind of jokes, I think, the three little pigs… and the same type of questions, but I just have to laugh. Yeah, I hear them,”
Lanfear just digs right in and gets to work plastering Carrie’s two-story contemporary style house.
Lanfear says to do it right you have to get dirty. He fills the wood frame with tightly packed straw bales. Next, the walls are coated inside and out with layers of clay plaster. It’s made with clay dug right from the site. Lanfear says it’s very organic and sustainable. But he says it also withstands the test of time.
“There are homes in Nebraska they didn’t even know that they were straw bale – they were actually hay bale. The walls got open, they were doing repairs and they discovered this hay in there and it actually looked fresh and they were a hundred years old.”
He says that’s because the plaster seals out the moisture but still allows the walls to breathe. That prevents mold and keeps the house sound. It also gets high marks for fire safety. And because the wheat straw is a just a bunch of hollow tubes it creates the air space that makes it a good insulator. Virtually everything about the house is eco-friendly.
The house also has solar heat and power. And it’s made mostly with reused materials. Even the trees cut down to make room for the house were brought inside and used for the framing. And Zaingline says rebuilding on her same small lot near the city means she’s not adding to urban sprawl. She likes to think straw bale houses could be a trend.
“The difference you can make, even though you’re only one person. I think it’s important for everyone to make these changes even if their small.”
Zaingline says her little straw bale house stands up just as well as any house made out of sticks or brick. It might just stand up to the bluster of critics too.
Pam Dashiell is with the Lower 9th Ward Center for Sustainable Engagement and Development. The Lower 9th Ward is in the background. (Photo by Samara Freemark)
There are various green houses and developments in the 9th being constructed by several different groups - including GoGreen and the Make it Right Foundation. Note the solar panels, raised houses, and odd roof lines. (Photo by Samara Freemark)
Four years ago, Hurricane Katrina
hit New Orleans. The city still
hasn’t figured out how to protect
itself. Most of the conversation
focuses on rebuilding the city’s
levees. But some people in New
Orleans are starting to think beyond
levees. They call their strategy
resilience planning. And they think
New Orleans can become America’s
leader in it. Samara Freemark reports:
Transcript
Four years ago, Hurricane Katrina
hit New Orleans. The city still
hasn’t figured out how to protect
itself. Most of the conversation
focuses on rebuilding the city’s
levees. But some people in New
Orleans are starting to think beyond
levees. They call their strategy
resilience planning. And they think
New Orleans can become America’s
leader in it. Samara Freemark reports:
When Pam Dashiell moved back to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, she couldn’t believe what people were saying about her neighborhood.
“People were saying, well, the 9th Ward should be a drainage ditch. There’s no way it can possibly come back.”
Dashiell is the co-director of the Lower 9th Ward Center for Sustainable Engagement and Development. And after the storm, she became one of the leaders demanding the city be built back exactly as it had been before. New houses put up wherever old ones had been knocked down. Social services restored to all neighborhoods. And most importantly, levees. Levees big enough and strong enough to protect the city from anything a hurricane could throw at it.
“That was the fundamental argument and discussion back then. That was the battle.”
But Dashiell’s thinking has changed over the past couple of years. The levees that were promised after Katrina still haven’t been completed. Dashiell says eventually she gave up on them and started looking for other solutions.
“You’ve got to move. You’ve got to go forward. At this point we are not protected. So we gotta act like that and deal accordingly.”
“Levees and stuff like that are great, but they’re not going to be the salvation of this area.”
That’s Marco Cocito-Manoc. He’s with the Greater New Orleans Foundation. They’re one of the groups involved in rebuilding the city.
“We can’t just lobby for bigger walls, higher walls. The truth is that New Orleans can never be sufficiently protected from flooding. So everyone has to adopt what in this area is a brand new mindset.”
Cocito-Manoc calls that new mindset “resilience planning”. That’s making small, local changes to help the city manage flood water, rather than trying to hold it back at all costs.
It’s a strategy that’s being implemented in the Lower 9th Ward by Pam Dashiell’s group and others. A lot of these groups have moved away from pushing for more levees. Instead, they’re building raised houses on higher ground, and making sure they’re properly weatherized. They’re perfecting evacuation plans, so when evacuations do happen, they’re quick and orderly. And they’re installing permeable surfaces and rain gardens to reduce surface water. These kinds of changes won’t prevent flooding, but they’ll limit the devastation that sometimes goes along with it.
Cocito-Manoc says measures like these could actually set an example for other cities that will face rising sea levels in the next century. Think New York, or Miami, or Boston.
“I know that it’s difficult to see New Orleans as leading in much. But I think this is really our opportunity to become a global center for learning how to cope with water, and use water as an asset rather than as something that threatens our existence.”
As for Pam Dashiell, her focus right now is on the Lower 9th Ward. I asked her how she imagined the future of her neighborhood.
“I would see rain gardens. Strong green infrastructure. I see a new sewer system. I see the lower 9th ward recognized as a community that helped lead the way to a more sustainable future. (Laughs) I got good dreams.”
The study found that differences in architectural style stuck out most, but after that, height.
(Photo source: Brendel at Wikimedia Commons)
There are some ugly terms used
to describe big, grandiose homes.
Critics call them “Garage Mahals,”
“starter castles,” or “McMansions.”
These insults are flung around
in towns where people worry big
houses are sapping the character
out of neighborhoods full of smaller,
older homes. Shawn Allee
met a researcher who hopes to tamp
down the heated rhetoric:
Transcript
There are some ugly terms used
to describe big, grandiose homes.
Critics call them “Garage Mahals,”
“starter castles,” or “McMansions.”
These insults are flung around
in towns where people worry big
houses are sapping the character
out of neighborhoods full of smaller,
older homes. Shawn Allee
met a researcher who hopes to tamp
down the heated rhetoric:
Jack Nasar studies city planning at Ohio State University.
He got interested in the term “McMansion” because it was used in his own neighorhood in Columbus.
“A realestate agent was befriending older people so that when they died she’d be able to get their properties, tear down the house, and then build a much larger house. I started to wonder whether this was happening elsewhere.”
Nasar says teardowns, and the insults used to describe them, are common in many towns. And some local governments are restricting how big these homes get or even what they look like.
Nasar says, with governments stepping in to the debate, there’s more at stake than just name-calling.
“You’re talking about controlling what goes on on somebody’s private property. So, you would want to have good evidence to use as a basis for that decision.”
Nasar recently studied just what it takes for a house to get big enough or different enough for people to say, “yuck” or hurl an insult like “McMansion.” Nasar and a research partner created computer models of streets with rows of houses.
For each test, they made most houses normal, but changed up something about one of them – stuff like the architectural style, the height, or maybe distance between the house and the street. Then, they showed these models to people.
“We had them rate these streets in terms of compatibility, we had them rate them in terms of visual quality or preference.”
Differences in architectural style stuck out most, but after that, height.
“The effect started to be most noticeable when the in-fill house was twice as large as the stuff around it. So, in terms of regulations, it suggests maybe a community could get by saying, ‘you could do a tear-down replacement that’s twice as big as what’s around it,’ but you wouldn’t let it get any larger than that.”
This is a controversial finding.
Some communities keep height range much lower than “twice as big” figure and sometimes they restrict width, too – something Nasar found doesn’t matter so much.
I thought I’d bounce some of his findings off someone involved in the teardown issue.
“This also was a demolition of a small home.”
Catherine Czerniak drives me around Lake Forest, a Chicago suburb. She’s the community development director, and she gets the praise or blame about how teardowns get done.
Czerniak says Nasar’s findings make sense, especially the idea that style matters most.
“We often say height and size aren’t necessarily the key roles -it’s how the design is done.”
But for Czerniak, there’s a hot-button issue Nasar did not measure.
Lake Forest has lots of tree-lined streets and people like how the trees obscure the houses.
“And really, the landscaping really defines the character of the community. Even the estates on the east side, were not there to shout from the street, here I am, look at me.”
To make the point she drives past a mix of old homes and replacements.
I can hardly tell which is which.
“As we go down the street, take note that even though there are some big homes back here, you still feel you’re in a country lane.”
Czerniak says Nasar’s research might quiet down some debates but people will always fight over specific details. After all, Nasar’s test subjects gave quick judgements on computer models.
She says, in the real world, critics spend years nit-picking every little thing they hate about a teardown replacement home and whether it’s going to ruin their neighborhood.
Some experts in the study say the U.S. could reduce emissions by up to 11% in the next 40 years - just by building housing closer together. (Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
