Jesse Miller * July 31, 2024
Some urban wildlife. My kids love feeding ducks oats and peas at the Arrington Lagoon.
“should not be tried.”
In the 1950’s, Mennonite pastor John Miller met with members of a Bruderhof community as he explored the idea of starting a Christian community in Evanston. At the time, Anabaptist communities, including Mennonites and the Bruderhof, tended to be rural. The Bruderhof members told Miller that forming a Christian community in the city “has never been done and should not be tried.”1
But, more than sixty years later, Reba Place Fellowship and Reba Place Church are still here. I think the Reba community has thrived in part because of its location in Evanston, a city where people can live close together and walk to get around.
This is the first of three Eco-Letters focusing on the built environment in Evanston—exploring a few ways a city like ours has been a good setting for community2 and is good from a climate and biodiversity standpoint. I also want to consider how we could encourage our city to continue moving in a direction that benefits people and nature.
A Tangled Web
Think about life in most of suburban North America. Everyone lives in their own home in their subdivision with their lawn and garage. When they leave, they hop in their car and drive to work or the shopping center. It’s the American Dream, but also, kind of isolating and lonely.
Evanston, by contrast, has a traditional neighborhood design. Density of buildings, a grid pattern of city blocks, and mixed residential and commercial zoning all help to make a place walkable.
Along with health and environmental benefits, a walkable city creates opportunities for social connection. We know this at Reba. When I leave my apartment, it’s not uncommon to run into several people I know before I cross the street. These small interactions build community over time.3 Imagine if we left a trail of thread behind as we went about our day so that we could see the path of all of us at Reba Church. What kind of tangle would we create?
A Field Trip Proposal
What if our city was even more walkable, a place with even less traffic? When Melissa and Chris Bruntlett moved with their two kids from Vancouver, BC, to Delft in the Netherlands, it was the psychological and social benefits of a low-traffic city that caught their attention. They write about their experiences in their book, Curbing Traffic: The Human Case for Fewer Cars in Our Lives:
“Suddenly we found ourselves living in an environment where we could hear again. Having been accustomed to the prevalence of engines, we had forgotten the sounds that give life to a city: people talking, birds singing, bells ringing, and music playing. At the same time, we watched our children enjoy the independence and freedom of moving autonomously on their own streets. These inclusive spaces welcomed virtually anyone; including the aging and disabled. In this immersive environment, levels of trust and compassion were clear through eye contact with fellow travelers. We saw how such an environment permits frequent and meaningful connections with our community, allowing us to meet and interact with our new neighbors.”
We are used to accepting our city as it is. We accept the stress of crossing a busy intersection, holding the hands of our children, as inevitable. It’s difficult to imagine alternatives and see what’s possible without experiencing a different place. Maybe we all need a field trip to Delft? Or, for now, I do recommend listening to this interview with the Bruntletts.
Volts:
The many social and psychological benefits of low-car cities
When Melissa and Chris Bruntlett moved to the small city of Delft in the Netherlands, they were blown away by the myriad social and health benefits of their new home’s low-car urban infrastructure. In this episode, they discuss their book Curbing Traffic: The Human Case for Fewer Cars in Our Lives…
Listen now:
2 years ago · 48 likes · 8 comments · David Roberts
Back to the Land?
It’s tempting to think that moving to the country will get us closer to nature. The Bruderhof probably had some good reasons for choosing a rural setting. There is something about growing things that can help us see our dependence on forces larger than us. Farmers need to collaborate with creation to succeed. But, farmland isn’t necessarily more “natural” than a city. There’s not a lot of biodiversity in modern monoculture farms, and in Illinois, the “Prairie State,” less than 0.01 percent of our original prairie remains. On the other hand, cities, with their coyotes and peregrines, contain more wildlife than we might expect.
When it comes to climate, living in a compact, walkable city is much better than living in a place that requires a lot of driving. We need to replace fossil fuel vehicles with electric ones, but it would be even better to rethink our sprawling suburbs. A recent study finds that urban sprawl is “responsible for one-third of all greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution.” That’s a lot! Where we live and how we use our land matters when it comes to a more sustainable future.
Evanston’s Future
I hope all this doesn’t sound too theoretical, or just about the big picture. City policy and urban design can be boring and take a long time to move in a new direction.
But, I want to draw our attention to this because things are happening. The City of Evanston is making plans and wants our feedback. The City has finished the first round of community engagement meetings for Envision Evanston, a new comprehensive plan and zoning code. Thankfully, Mayor Biss assures us that that sustainability will be “woven into every aspect” of the plan.
I’m also encouraged by the hire of a new Transportation and Mobility Coordinator, Sarah FioRito. She used to be an instructor at Working Bikes, a nonprofit community bike shop similar to The Recyclery, where I used to work. I’m glad to have someone at the City with that background as an ally!
Yet, change can be slow. The specific proposals that come out of Envision Evanston will get pushback from some residents. That’s totally understandable. I hope we can engage these issues, and work with our neighbors to create a more vibrant, more equitable, more sustainable city.
A few more things
Jeff Speck wrote a book called Walkable City and his TED Talk is a good place to start learning about these things.
Rat poison doesn’t work, and neither does introducing semi-feral cats. “The only effective way to control rats is to control the food source.” Read more in the RoundTable.
Watch this video about a small, urban forest planted in Cambridge, MA.
“The planet just saw its hottest day on record” (CNN)
“What Project 2025 would do to climate policy in the US” (Yale Climate Connections)
1
This quote is from Glimpses of Glory, but I don’t have that on my shelf, so I found it referenced in this essay on intentional urban communities.
2
I’m mostly talking about community in general here rather than intentional Christian community specifically. I’m thinking about what is good for both us and our neighbors.
3
I don’t mean to imply that one can create community with design alone. Architects and planners with good intentions have attempted many times to design utopian communities and failed. However, certain designs make a sense of community more likely (like having people live close together), and others make it less likely (like a highway splitting a neighborhood).
Comments