“We need density but we also need connections to nature,” said University of Virginia professor Timothy Beatley, at an event at the University of the District of Columbia (UDC) to celebrate D.C.’s successful inclusion in the Biophilic Cities Network, a group of leading cities pushing for rich, nature-filled experiences in daily urban life.
Beatley launched the network only a few years ago, but it already seems to have taken off. Building on the impact of his important books, Green Urbanism, Biophilic Cities, and Blue Urbanism, the network is designed to improve knowledge-sharing among cities who seek to merge the built and natural environments. Leading environmental cities — such as Singapore; Portland; San Francisco; Wellington, New Zealand; and now, Washington, D.C. — have joined, and another 20-30 cities are now exploring signing on.
Beatley explained how biophilic cities forge deeper, more meaningful connections to nature, which in turn increases social connections and community resilience. He then highlighted some biophilic urban innovations:
Singapore (see video at top) is now putting “nature at the heart of its planning and design process.” Singapore’s official tagline used to be “garden city,” but now it’s “the city in a garden.” The idea, Beatley explained, is “not to visit a garden but to live in it; not to visit a park, but to live in it.” To realize this concept, Singapore has issued a landscape replacement policy that ensures any greenery removed through the process of developing a lot be replaced on the building eventually found there. In reality, though, developers, architects, and landscape architects have doubled or tripled the amount of original green footprint in buildings’ structures through the use of sky gardens. “There is now a competition among developers to see who can add more green.” The city has also built nearly 300 kilometers of park connectors to create deeper connections between parks and neighborhoods.
Melbourne, Australia, has pledged to double its tree canopy by 2040. “They are re-imagining the idea of the city in a forest. It’s a multi-scale investment in nature — from the rooftop to the bio-region and everywhere in between.” Individual trees are now being registered and made accessible via GIS maps. To further boost engagement, locals can also email love notes to a tree and the trees will write a note back.
A number of cities are forging deeper connections to urban wildlife, too. In Bangalore, there’s the Slender Loris project that engages citizen scientists in noctural journeys through the city to meet these shy creatures. Austin, Texas has gone completely batty, in a good way. Underneath Congress Bridge, millions of bat fly out at dusk during the warmer months to feed. Above and below the bridge, people gather to watch the amazing exoduses and sometime-murmurations. “There are now bat-watching dinner cruises.”
In St. Louis, there’s Milkweeds for Monarchs, which has resulted in 250 new butterfly gardens. San Francisco will soon mandate the use of bird-friendly building facades. And in Wellington, city officials are investing in predator-proof fencing in many areas with the goal of “bringing birdsong back.”
“Biophilic experiences are multi-sensory. Animal sounds can re-animate our cities. People want more nature; they want to hear birdsong in their neigborhoods,” said Beatley.
Stella Tarnay, co-founder of Biophilic DC, wants D.C. to become even more nature-filled. Her group will monitor new city projects to ensure they actually integrate greenery and boost biodiversity. For example, in Adams Morgan, plans are underway to remake the Marie Reed Learning Center with a set of green roofs and gardens, but it will be important to guarantee none of those great landscape plans get cut at the last minute for budgetary reasons.
Also in the works: building more support for the city’s wildlife action plan through expanded environmental education programs. As Maribeth DeLorenzo, deputy director of D.C.’s urban sustainability administration, explained, “there are now 270 species of birds in the district, 70 species of fish, 32 species of mammals, and hundreds of species of invertebrates.” But greater awareness is needed of these species — along with the biodiversity benefits of a clean and ecologically-healthy Anacostia River and the district goal of achieving a 40 percent tree canopy by 2032.
Reblogged this on Mental Flowers and commented:
Cities working to incorporate more natural scapes.
I have read “Biophilic Cities” and I found it very disturbing. Mr. Beatley confuses love for nature with nativism. His definition of biodiversity is confined to native plants and animals. That viewpoint is responsible for destroying far more nature than it preserves.
Here in the San Francisco Bay Area the native plant movement has a death grip on our public lands. It has destroyed tens of thousands of our trees and it demands the destruction of hundreds of thousands more trees because they are not native. These projects usually don’t plant anything. Therefore, the result is a significant loss of nature.
Adding insult to injury, these projects use pesticides to destroy the vegetation they do not like. They are poisoning our parks and open spaces.
Here is an article about why cities must adopt a more cosmopolitan view of nature: https://milliontrees.me/2015/05/29/restoration-is-just-horticulture-dressed-up-to-look-like-ecology/
Biophilic cities with higher buildings can meet the peak of sustainability only if they habitat natural wild animals such as giraffe, lions, elephants, zebra, rhino, leopards and other wildlife and aquatic species for attraction and hygiene to obtain good atmosphere! One can get all these when visiting the beautiful country Tanzania at serenget, manyara ngoronoro national parks.
In Providence RI I lead toad and tadpole tours. Amphibians are a great indicator of the health of the water and ecosytems. There is now a strong effort to develop new ways of managing stormwater, and my work inthe coalition is to make sure we remeber to use some of the now clean water for habitat.
My question is, with the world’s burgeoning population and the increasing difficulty in feeding its population, why plant bushes when we can plant food? Urban agriculture anyone?