Transcript Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism

Regional and Neighborhood
Development:
Planning the Evolution of Our Suburbs
A Special Presentation to the
USGBC Fox Valley Chapter
Mahender Vasandani
Chairman. Education and Outreach Committee, CNU-Illinois
August 27, 2009
What I Will Talk About:
 Where Are We Today in Terms of Regional Growth?
 What Are the Implications of the “Big Challenges” for
Evolution of Suburbs?
 Why the Suburbs May Need to Evolve?
 Are There Any Preferred Growth Options?


What Can We Learn from the Cities?
New Urbanism Offers Some Key Answers
 Specific NU Examples Suitable For Suburbs
 Overview of Form-Based Codes/A NU Implementation Tool
Q&A
2
Far Chicago Suburbs
3
Where Are We Today?
Acknowledgement: Ours Is A Suburban Nation
(In A Capitalist Democracy)
 From 1950 to 2000: 90% of metropolitan growth in the Suburbs
 By 2000:
 60% of metro jobs in the Suburbs
 Suburb-to-Suburb job commutes 2X Suburb-City commutes
 From 1970 to 2000:

Total Housing Units Increased 9%
 Suburban Housing Units Increased Almost 100%
Questions:
Is This All Good? All Bad? Or, Are There Pros And Cons?
What Are the Implications for Future Regional Growth?
4
Implications for the Future…
Response Depends on One’s Perspective on the Age-Old Debate:
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-op-kotkin6-2008jul06,0,1038461.story
The “Leinbergers”
vs.
The “Kotkins”
City living is good/better
Suburban living is good/better
Living + working in City is the only
way forward; More sustainable
Living closer to suburban jobs keeps
travel miles low
Multiple transportation modes and
route options
Car-dependent travel; limited
route options
A mix of uses within walking distance Single, isolated uses force car
travel for all needs
Less car use = Less pollution
More car use = More pollution;
More congestion
Many suburbs will not survive
Suburban demand will remain strong
5
Implications for the Future…
My view: To survive/thrive in the future:
 Suburban regions will need to:



Provide for all transportation options:
Cars, Trains, Buses, Bicycles and Pedestrian-ways
Extend Existing Commuter Service to Outlying Suburbs
Start the new Metra “STAR” Line
 Suburbs will need to:







Allow mixing of uses
Allow diversity of housing options/housing types
Allow moderately higher densities
Allow street connectivity
Allow multi-functional streets/boulevards
Create compact and walkable neighborhoods
Create great places
……Become More Urban (“New Urban”)
6
Why Do the Suburbs Need to Evolve?
I. Economic Challenges:
 Housing Over-Supply
 Commercial Oversupply
Implications:
Limited/Slow Short-term Growth Potential; Extended Growth Timelines
II. Energy Security/Climate-Change Challenges:
 Over-dependence on high-carbon fossil fuels/GHG Emissions
 Over-dependence on cars as sole form of mobility
Implications/Policy Questions:
”Re-Order” Growth Patterns?
Reduce Total Car Travel?
New Mobility Technologies?
III. Community Character Challenge:
 Little Attention to the Public Realm/Urban Form
Implication:
Better Character and Quality of Life Can Provide Key Market
Advantages
7
Climate Change: “Re-Order” Regional Growth Patterns
Chicago
Metro: Over
100 Years of
Growth
Recommendations from
the Past and other
States:
1. Create Growth
Boundaries/
Stop Suburbanization
2. Limit Infrastructure
Spending
 In Chicago Metro Area:
“Re-ordering” Virtually
Impossible for Historical
and Political Reasons
 Most Strategies and
Benefits Possible at
Local Level
Source:

2010
2020
“Re-Order” Growth Patterns
2030
LEED-ND
2040
8
Climate Change: Reduce Total Vehicle Miles Travelled
Typical Recommendations:
1. Reduce Total Miles of Travel, 2. Encourage Higher Density Living
3. Encourage Live-Work Units 4. Encourage People to Live Close to Work
5. Build TODs 6. Avoid Car Trips
Trip-length shortening
not as beneficial as
cutting down on number
of trips
-- Joe Cortright, Impresa
Consulting for “CEOs for
Cities”
 California SB 375
Example
 STAR LINE and TODs
will cut down on auto
trips
 By increasing
walkability New
Urbanism will help
achieve Trip Avoidance.
2010
2020
 Reduce Total Travel Miles
2030
2040
9
Climate Change: New Mobility Technology
New Alternate Zero-Emission Fuels and Alternate Vehicle Technologies*
(*”Since VMT are not projected to decrease
significantly in the near or long-term in the
Chicago region, CMAP’s strategies to promote
alternative fuels are important to help save energy
and mitigate GHG and criteria pollutions” –
Volpe Center, U.S. DOT -- October 2008
Action Strategy Paper on Climate Change and Energy)
My Crystal Ball ???!!!
In Another Generation:
1. NMT use wide-spread
2. Less serious concern with GHG
emissions/pollution
3. Little change in locational decisions
4. More cars on limited capacity roads
5. MORE TRAFFIC CONGESTION
6. MORE NEED FOR WALKABLE,
MIXED-USE COMMUNITIES with
TRANSIT OPTIONS
NMT Evolution!
Toyota FCHV in 2015
“Shockingly Low Price”
Honda FCX
Clarity: 2009
2010
-Toyota Motors
www.autobloggreen.com
July 20, 2009 article
2020
 New Mobility Technology
Image source:
www.discoveryresources.com
2030
2040
10
Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism
New Urbanism: A 20+ year old Planning and Urban Design
Discipline
NU learns from the virtues of existing and past cities.
NU helps create:
 Compact, Connected, Walkable, Diverse Neighborhoods with MixedUses
 Quality Public Realm and High Quality of Life
 Distinct Transportation Solutions
 New Codes and Tools for Implementation
Examples from
City of Chicago:
Neighborhoods
and Boulevards
11
NU Design Principles for Suburban Neighborhoods








Create Inter-connected Street Network Between Neighborhoods
Create Neighborhoods with Centers with Mixed-Uses within Walking Distance of Most Residents
Locate Neighborhood Centers with Exposure and Access to Major Arterials
Allow A Variety of Residential Types
Allow Moderately High Densities
Focus on Urban Design along with concerns with land-use, transportation, finances and services
Help Create Quality Places/Stay competitive in market place
Evolve as a Suburban Community…Become More Urban – “New Urban”
12
Key NU Design Principles
Adopt not just a tax-revenue-based land-use policy…
But also an Urban Design Policy...Allow Boulevards with Multiple Transportation Modes,
Mixed-Uses and/or Multiple Residential Types (maybe not this dense) along Boulevards
13
Key NU Design Principles
For better traffic circulation
and less traffic congestion,
avoid/minimize cul-de-sacs
and dead-end streets as
they promote greater car
dependence
Instead, allow wellconnected network of
streets that may or may not
be in rectilinear grids
14
Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism: Example 1
Harbor Town, Memphis,
TN:
Variety of Residential
Types
Mixed-Uses
Connected Neighborhoods
Boulevard System
Strong Sense of Place
15
Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism: Example 2
New Town at St. Charles, MO:
Innovative Variety of Residential Types
Mixed-Use Center/Civic Center
Integrated/Creative Stormwater System
High-quality Public Realm/Sense of Place
16
Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism: Example 3
Legacy Center, Plano, Texas
Town Center on street grid
Commercial, Office, Hotel, Restaurants, Townhomes, Condominiums/Apartments
Central Civic Space/Sense of Place
17
Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism: Example 4
Addison Circle, Addison, Texas:
Close to suburban train station
Primarily Residential with Townhomes and Apartments
Major Open Space Central to Plan
Moderately High Density
High Quality of Space/Strong Sense of Place
18
Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism: Example 5
Southlake Center, Southlake, Texas:
Central Civic Space: Foreground to Village Hall
Surrounded by Mixed-Use Shopping + Offices, Entertainment, Restaurants and Townhomes
Major Innovation from Single-Use Shopping Center (as initially proposed)
Highly Successful Community Destination/Community Pride
19
Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism: Example 6
Plano TOD, Texas:
New downtown/TOD at a DART station
Moderately dense Neighborhoods with Mixed-Use Shopping
Economic Development/Transit Ridership Increase/Sustainable Model
20
Public Support for Transit
Maintain/Repair
Existing Roads,
Highways,
Bridges:
Build Walkable
Communities:
Improve
Transit:
25%
31%
50%
Improve Public
Transportation:
47%
Not Sure:
8%
Expand/Improve
Roads:
Build New
Roads:
16%
Not Sure:
1
3%
Not Sure:
2
5%
Survey Questions*:
1. Transportation Priorities of Federal Government
2. Best Long-Term Solutions to Reduce Congestion
3. Transportation Approach to Accommodate Growth
Build highways
and freeways:
20%
Build commuter
rail, light rail and
subways:
75%
3
20%
*January 2009 Growth and Transportation Survey by Hart Assoc.
As reported in “Common Ground” Summer 2009,
Published by National Association of Realtors
21
Federal Legislative Initiatives: Livable Communities Act
August 6, 2009: Senator Christopher Dodd
introduced a
Livable Communities Act that will help communities:






Mitigate traffic congestion
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions
Cut down on fuel consumption
Protect open space
Build affordable housing
Revitalize existing main streets and urban centers
The Livable Communities Act will:
 Create competitive planning grants to create long-term plans
 Create challenge grants that towns and regions can use to implement these long-term plans
 Establish a federal Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities at the HUD and oversee
the Livable Communities grant programs;
 Establish a federal Interagency Council on Sustainable Communities to coordinate federal
sustainable development policies.
22
New Urbanism Regulations: Form-Based Codes
1. Relatively New Regulation Tool in Illinois
2.
Based on A Community Vision
3.
Focus is the Public Realm (Form and Quality of the Outside Built Environment)
4.
Place-specific to Retain Existing Character
5.
Several Urban Standards
6.
Graphic/More Comprehensible
7.
Predictable Urban Form and Character
8.
Different from Conventional Zoning Regulations




FBCs more concerned with Urban Form, Less with Use
FBCs facilitate mixing of uses
Not concerned with F.A.R.s, Densities and Lot Coverages
Allow administrative approval of projects
23
Form-Based Codes/Regulations
 Focus on Quality of the Built Environment for Public Realm
Public realm
influenced by the
architecture of
buildings;
the proportions of the
size of public places
to building heights
and the amenities
in the public places
Project Credit: Dover Kohl & Partners
24
Form-Based Codes/Regulations
 Predictable Placement and Bulk of Buildings
• PREDICTABILITY of massing
and bulk of future projects
• Less public concern about
bulk and other impacts
• Potential benefit:
Streamlined project review
process
• Good for developers too
Project Credit: Dover Kohl & Partners
25
Form-Based Codes/Regulations
 An Integrated Code with Standards for:
Thoroughfares, Frontages, Building Types, Public Spaces,
Landscaping – All Linked to a Regulating Plan
 Typically Easier to Comprehend and Administer
26
Form-Based Codes/Regulations
 Conventional/Euclidian
 FBCs
 Based on Abstract Land Use and
 Based on Adopted Community Vision
Zoning Categories
 Segregated/Isolated Uses
 Mixed Uses
 Proscribes (What Is Not Allowed)
 Prescribe (What Is Desirable)
 Unpredictable Building Bulk/Form
 Predictable Building/Urban Form
(F.A.R.s and Densities by Lot Size)
 Unpredictable Character
(Bulk Limits regardless of Lot Size )
 Vision of Built Form Predetermined based
on
Site Development Capacity Analyses
(Max. Heights, Bulk); Retain existing or
create new character
 Rarely Any Sense of Place
 Power of Place
27
Closing Remarks
 Future of Suburbs:
Assumed to Evolve Given Economic, Energy and Climate Challenges
Evolution Will be Essential for Survival/Revival/”Thrival”
 New Urbanism Offers Key Answers for Suburban Evolution
NU Design Principles Should be Part of a Suburban Community’s Policy
Quality Places and Quality of Life Will be Market Advantages
 Form-Based Codes/Regulations Provide an Effective Tool
to Create Mixed-Use Centers and Achieve Community Vision
28
Thank You!
Mahender Vasandani
Chairman, Education and Outreach Committee
CNU-Illinois
President
M Square | Urban Design
Phone: 630.845.1202
Email: [email protected]
29