New Urbanism in the Planning Office
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Session:New Urbanism Meets the Planning Office (March 12, 8:45am)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Urbanism in the Planning Office
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Session:New Urbanism Meets the Planning Office (March 12, 8:45am) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ContentsApplying New Urbanism to the Planning Office Principles of Traditional Design Tape Series Livable Neighborhoods, Community Design Code, Western Australia Ministry of Planning Moving into the Future by Understanding the Past: Innovations in Planning
Applying New Urbanism to the Planning OfficeDeveloping a planning program around the principles and practice of New Urbanism and Traditional town planning requires a philosophical understanding of the development of towns and the historical role of the planner. These techniques are neither difficult or beyond the ability of planners. However, due to the lack of exposure in most planning programs, reacquainting oneself to the principles does require effort on the part of the practitioner. To bring the practices to a community as the planning director requires not only an understanding but a sincere commitment to challenge the conventional way that we have carried on our business. It also requires planners to leave the more comfortable administrative cocoon to the decision-making world of town building and civic design. However, it does not require you as planner to be a designer, but rather to understand the role that civic design plays in today’s towns and villages. The information provided includes a toolkit of information that I have used in educating my staff elected and appointed officials the community and myself. Yet, we must begin with a basic understanding that new urbanism is a complete planning approach. It recognizes the regional complexities and the impact of individual decisions for each street. As outlined in the Charter of the New Urbanism, the principles practiced by new urbanists provide a comprehensive approach to planning. The preamble clearly states that "disinvestment in central cities, the spread of placeless sprawl, increasing separation by race and income, environmental deterioration, loss of agricultural lands and wilderness, and the erosion of society's built heritage (are) one interrelated community-building challenge." Further new urbanists "stand for the restoration of existing urban centers and towns within coherent metropolitan regions, the reconfiguration of sprawling suburbs into communities of real neighborhoods and diverse districts, the conservation of natural environments, and the preservation of our built legacy." Finally new urbanists "recognize that physical solutions by themselves will not solve social and economic problems, but neither can economic vitality, community stability, and environmental health be sustained without a coherent and supportive physical framework." These foundational principles are further broken into three primary areas. First, successful community-building begins by understanding regional economic, open space, environmental, transportation, and development systems. I am excited about the work of the Cumberland Region Tomorrow (CRT) in Middle Tennessee, which has picked up the challenge of the Peirce Report completed for Nashville in 1999. CRT has contracted with Mr. John Fregonese of Fregonese Calthorpe Associates to undertake a 13 county regional visioning project. This project is the first step in understanding and defining the critical issues, values and goals of the region. It will for the first time challenge us into examining whether the future we are creating today is the future that we want. The second primary area defines the importance of the neighborhood as the historical building block of sustainable communities. Neighborhoods that recognize the importance of choices, mixed uses and the ability to properly adapt and change over time provide places that people want to live. These neighborhoods provide a mixture of housing together with parks, open space and shopping and employment opportunities. They create a whole that is greater than the sum of the parts. The neighborhood planning work currently underway with the residents of North Nashville is grounded upon the importance of building new and enhancing old neighborhoods. Finally, new urbanists understand that neighborhoods are built at the building, block, and street level, one decision at a time. The relationships are not difficult to understand, but they are based on the understanding that there are appropriate places for public space and private spaces; civic buildings are important; and the public realm should be acknowledged and celebrated. Nashville’s new Urban Zoning Overlay begins the process of encouraging infill neighborhood development at the building level. Additional changes to the zoning code remain necessary to allow development to occur in a way that adds value to the community as opposed to only achieving the minimum. The use of these principles has resulted in building the great places in the world and when applied can do the same in the future. We can address issues such as the need for affordable housing. We can use existing infrastructure instead of spending money on new. We can provide meaningful alternative transportation choices. We can preserve our quality of life and protect our sensitive environment and open spaces. We can decide the future we want. The tools are available. The question is whether we will. As an alternative to conventional development practices, New Urbanists offer a form of community building that can provide better places to live. It is up to us to decide whether we want to continue one choice, the choice of endless sprawl, traffic congestion and inefficient delivery of services, or work to provide communities with sustainable choices and vitality. [back to Contents] CHARTER OF THE NEW URBANISMThe Congress for the New Urbanism views disinvestment in central cities, the spread of placeless sprawl, increasing separation by race and income, environmental deterioration, loss of agricultural lands and wilderness, and the erosion of society's built heritage as one interrelated community-building challenge. We stand for the restoration of existing urban centers and towns within coherent metropolitan regions, the reconfiguration of sprawling suburbs into communities of real neighborhoods and diverse districts, the conservation of natural environments, and the preservation of our built legacy. We recognize that physical solutions by themselves will not solve social and economic problems, but neither can economic vitality, community stability, and environmental health be sustained without a coherent and supportive physical framework. We advocate the restructuring of public policy and development practices to support the following principles: neighborhoods should be diverse in use and population; communities should be designed for the pedestrian and transit as well as the car; cities and towns should be shaped by physically defined and universally accessible public spaces and community institutions; urban places should be framed by architecture and landscape design that celebrate local history, climate, ecology, and building practice. We represent a broad-based citizenry, composed of public and private sector leaders, community activists, and multidisciplinary professionals. We are committed to reestablishing the relationship between the art of building and the making of community, through citizen-based participatory planning and design. We dedicate ourselves to reclaiming our homes, blocks, streets, parks, neighborhoods, districts, towns, cities, regions, and environment. We assert the following principles to guide public policy, development practice, urban planning, and design: The region: Metropolis, city, and town 1. Metropolitan regions are finite places with geographic boundaries derived from topography, watersheds, coastlines, farmlands, regional parks, and river basins. The metropolis is made of multiple centers that are cities, towns, and villages, each with its own identifiable center and edges. 2. The metropolitan region is a fundamental economic unit of the contemporary world. Governmental cooperation, public policy, physical planning, and economic strategies must reflect this new reality. 3. The metropolis has a necessary and fragile relationship to its agrarian hinterland and natural landscapes. The relationship is environmental, economic, and cultural. Farmland and nature are as important to the metropolis as the garden is to the house. 4. Development patterns should not blur or eradicate the edges of the metropolis. Infill development within existing urban areas conserves environmental resources, economic investment, and social fabric, while reclaiming marginal and abandoned areas. Metropolitan regions should develop strategies to encourage such infill development over peripheral expansion. 5. Where appropriate, new development contiguous to urban boundaries should be organized as neighborhoods and districts, and be integrated with the existing urban pattern. Noncontiguous development should be organized as towns and villages with their own urban edges, and planned for a jobs/housing balance, not as bedroom suburbs. 6. The development and redevelopment of towns and cities should respect historical patterns, precedents, and boundaries. 7. Cities and towns should bring into proximity a broad spectrum of public and private uses to support a regional economy that benefits people of all incomes. Affordable housing should be distributed throughout the region to match job opportunities and to avoid concentrations of poverty. 8. The physical organization of the region should be supported by a framework of transportation alternatives. Transit, pedestrian, and bicycle systems should maximize access and mobility throughout the region while reducing dependence upon the automobile. 9. Revenues and resources can be shared more cooperatively among the municipalities and centers within regions to avoid destructive competition for tax base and to promote rational coordination of transportation, recreation, public services, housing, and community institutions. The neighborhood, the district, and the corridor 1. The neighborhood, the district, and the corridor are the essential elements of development and redevelopment in the metropolis. They form identifiable areas that encourage citizens to take responsibility for their maintenance and evolution. 2. Neighborhoods should be compact, pedestrian-friendly, and mixed-use. Districts generally emphasize a special single use, and should follow the principles of neighborhood design when possible. Corridors are regional connectors of neighborhoods and districts; they range from boulevards and rail lines to rivers and parkways. 3. Many activities of daily living should occur within walking distance, allowing independence to those who do not drive, especially the elderly and the young. Interconnected networks of streets should be designed to encourage walking, reduce the number and length of automobile trips, and conserve energy. 4. Within neighborhoods, a broad range of housing types and price levels can bring people of diverse ages, races, and incomes into daily interaction, strengthening the personal and civic bonds essential to an authentic community. 5. Transit corridors, when properly planned and coordinated, can help organize metropolitan structure and revitalize urban centers. In contrast, highway corridors should not displace investment from existing centers. 6. Appropriate building densities and land uses should be within walking distance of transit stops, permitting public transit to become a viable alternative to the automobile. 7. Concentrations of civic, institutional, and commercial activity should be embedded in neighborhoods and districts, not isolated in remote, single-use complexes. Schools should be sized and located to enable children to walk or bicycle to them. 8. The economic health and harmonious evolution of neighborhoods, districts, and corridors can be improved through graphic urban design codes that serve as predictable guides for change. 9. A range of parks, from tot-lots and village greens to ballfields and community gardens, should be distributed within neighborhoods. Conservation areas and open lands should be used to define and connect different neighborhoods and districts. The block, the street, and the building 1. A primary task of all urban architecture and landscape design is the physical definition of streets and public spaces as places of shared use. 2. Individual architectural projects should be seamlessly linked to their surroundings. This issue transcends style. 3. The revitalization of urban places depends on safety and security. The design of streets and buildings should reinforce safe environments, but not at the expense of accessibility and openness. 4. In the contemporary metropolis, development must adequately accommodate automobiles. It should do so in ways that respect the pedestrian and the form of public space. 5. Streets and squares should be safe, comfortable, and interesting to the pedestrian. Properly configured, they encourage walking and enable neighbors to know each other and protect their communities. 6. Architecture and landscape design should grow from local climate, topography, history, and building practice. 7. Civic buildings and public gathering places require important sites to reinforce community identity and the culture of democracy. They deserve distinctive form, because their role is different from that of other buildings and places that constitute the fabric of the city. 8. All buildings should provide their inhabitants with a clear sense of location, weather and time. Natural methods of heating and cooling can be more resource-efficient than mechanical systems. 9. Preservation and renewal of historic buildings, districts, and landscapes affirm the continuity and evolution of urban society. For further information or to review the entire Charter of the New Urbanism with links to additional resources and projects please visit www.cnu.org. A NEW URBANISM BIBLIOGRAPHYINDISPENSABLE
Calthorpe, Peter. The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community, and the American Dream. Princeton Architectural Press, 1993.
Congress for the New Urbanism. Charter of the New Urbanism: Region / Neighborhood, District, and Corridor / Block, Street, and Building. New York: McGraw-Hill Books, 1999.
Ward, Stephen V., ed., The Garden City. E&F N Spon, 1992
Additional Important Suggestions Abercrombie, Patrick. Town and Country Planning. Revised by D. Rigby Childs. New York: Oxford University Press, 1959 (1933).
Adams, Thomas. Harvard City Planning Studies III: Neighborhoods of Small Homes. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1931. Anderson, R. John and Jason Miller, editors, Traditional Neighborhood Design, House Plans, Volume 1,2 and 3, Saint Paul: HomeStyles Publishing and Marketing Inc. 1996
Arendt, Randall G. Growing Greener: Putting Conservation into Plans and Ordinances. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1999. Arendt, Randall, Rural by Design: Maintaining Small Town Character. American Planning Association, 1994. The best book on land conservation and clustering Arnold, Henry F., Trees in Urban Design. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1980 Baldassare, Mark. Trouble in Paradise: The Suburban Transformation in America. Columbia University Press, 1988.
Barnett, Jonathan. The Fractured Metropolis: Improving the New City, Restoring the Old City, Reshaping the Region. Harper Collins 1995. Benevolo, Leonardo, The Origins of Modern Town Planning. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press, 1967.?A very readable short history
Benfield, F. Kaid, Matthew D. Raimi, Donald D. T. Chen. Once There Were Greenfields: How Urban Sprawl is Undermining America’s Environment, Economy and Social Fabric. New York: National Resources Defense Council, 1999. Berry, Jeffrey, et. al. The Rebirth of Urban Democracy. Brookings Institution, 1993. Beveridge, Charles E., et. al. Frederick Law Olmsted: Designing the American Landscape. New York: Rizzoli, 1995. Boeschenstein, Warren. Historic American Towns along the Atlantic Coast. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1999 Brooke, Steven. Seaside. New York: Pelican, 1995. Buder, Stanley. Visionaries and Planners: The Garden City Movement and the Modern Community. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Collins, George, Camillo Sitte and the Birth of Modern City Planning. New York: Rizzoli, 1986. Daniels, Tom. When City and Country Collide: Managing Growth in the Metropolitan Fringe. Washington D.C.: Island Press, 1999.
Downing, Andrew Jackson. The Architecture of Country Houses. Downing, A.J. New York, Dover Publications, 1969 (orginally published by D. Appleton & Company, 1850) Downs, Anthony. New Visions for Metropolitan America. Brookings Institution/Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 1994. Downs, Anthony. Stuck In Traffic: Coping With Peak-Hour Traffic Congestion. Brookings Institution, 1992.
Dutton, John C. New American Urbanism : Re-Forming the Suburban Metropolis, Skira, 2001
Engwicht, David. Street Reclaiming: Creating Livable Streets and Vibrant Communities. Gabriola Island, B.C.: New Society Publishers, 1999 Eppli, Mark J. and Charles C. Tu. Valuing the New Urbanism: The Impact of the New Urbanism on Prices of Single-family Homes. Washington, D.C.: ULI — the Urban Land Institute, 1999 Etzioni, Amitai. The Spirit of Community: The Reinvention of American Society. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994.
Gehl, Jan. Life Between Buildings. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1987. Giroud, Marc, Cities and People: A Social and Architectural History. Great Britain: Yale University Press, 1989 Goddard, Stephen B. Getting There: The Epic Struggle between Road and Rail in the American Century. University of Chicago Press, 1994. Gratz, Roberta Brandes and Norman Mintz. Cities Back From The Edge: New Life for Downtown. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1998 Hall, Peter, Cities in Civilization. New York: Pantheon Books, 1998
Heenan, David A., The New Corporate Frontier. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991. Explains the recent appeal of the small town to national corporations Hiss, Tony. The Experience of Place. Vintage Books, 1991. Hudnutt III, William H. Cities on the Rebound: A Vision for Urban America. Washington, D.C.: ULI — the Urban Land Institute, 1998 Jackson, Kenneth T. Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States. Oxford University Press, 1987.
Jacobs, Jane. Cities and the Wealth of Nations: Principles of Economic Life. Random House, 1985. Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Vintage Books, 1992. ?The original critique and still the best Jakle, J. A. The American Small Town - Twentieth-Century Place Images, Archon Books, Hamden, CT, 1982 Jekyll, Gertrude, Gardens for Small Country Houses. Suffolk: Woodbridge, 1912 The best technical manual for the design of private gardens Kay, Jane Holtz. Asphalt Nation. New York: Crown Publishers, 1997. Kelbaugh, Doug. The Pedestrian Pocket Book: A New Suburban Design Strategy. Princeton Architectural Press, 1989. Kemmis, Daniel. Community and the Politics of Place. University of Oklahoma Press, 1990. Kemmis, Daniel. The Good City and The Good Life. Houghton Mifflin, 1995.
Kostof, Spiro. The City Assembled: The Elements of Urban Form through History. Bulfinch Press, 1992. Kostof, Spiro. The City Shaped: Urban Patterns and Meanings through History. Bulfinch Press, 1994.
Kunstler, James Howard. Home from Nowhere: Remaking our Everyday World for the 21st Century. Simon & Schuster, 1996.
Lejeune, Jean-Francois (editor). The New City. Vol. 1 & 2. University of Miami School of Architecture/Princeton Architectural Press, 1994. Longo, Gianni. A Guide to Great American Public Places. Urban Initiatives. 1996.
MacKaye, Benton. The New Exploration: A Philosophy of Regional Planning. Champaign-Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1990. Reprint of 1928 Ed. Matthews, Janet Snyder. Venice, Journey from Horse and Chaise. Pine Level Press, 1989 McCamant, Kathryn and Durrett, Charles. Co-Housing, A Contemporary Approach to Housing Ourselves. Ten Speed Press, 1994. Moe, Richard and Carter Wilkie. Changing Places : Rebuilding Community in the Age of Sprawl. New York:Henry Holt & Company, 1977 Mohney, David, and Keller Easterling, eds. Seaside: Making a Town in America. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1991. Morrish, William. Planning to Stay. Milkweed Press, 1994.
Orfield, Myron. Metropolitics: A Regional Agenda for Community and Stability, Brookings Institution/Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 1997. Parks, Warren Wright. The Mariemont Story. Cincinnati: Creative Writers, 1967 Pick, Maritza. The Sierra Club Guide to Community Organizing: How to Save Your Neighborhood, City, or Town. Sierra Club Books, 1993. Polyzoides, Stefanos, et. al. Courtyard Housing in Los Angeles: A Typological Analysis. Princeton Architectural Press, 1992.
Reich, Robert B. The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for 21st Century Capitalism. Random House, 1992.
Rybczynski, Witold. City Life. New York: Scribner, 1995.
Sennett, Richard. The Conscience of the Eye: The Design and Social Life of Cities. W. W. Norton, 1992. Sennett, Richard. The Fall of Public Man. W. W. Norton, 1992. Sewell, John. The Shape of the City: Toronto Struggles With Modern Planning. University of Toronto Press, 1993. Short, C. W. Public buildings : a survey of architecture of projects constructed by federal and other governmental bodies between the years 1933 and 1939 with the assistance of the Public Works Administration. Stanley-Brown. Washington, D.C.: Public Works Administration : USGPO, 1939. Solomon, Daniel. Rebuilding. Princeton Architectural Press, 1992.
Southworth, Michael, Streets and the Shaping of Towns and Cities, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996
Stilgoe, John R., Common Landscape of America, 1580 to 1845. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982
Suarez, Ray. Old Neighborhood : What We Lost in the Great Suburban Migration, 1966-1999, New York: Free Press, 1999. Sucher, David. City Comforts. City Comforts Press, 1995.
Urban Land Institute (J. C. Nichols), The Community Builders Handbook, 1947 edition, 2000 reprint by ULI. Van Der Ryn, Sim and Calthorpe, Peter. Sustainable Communities: A New Design Syntheses for Cities, Suburbs, and Towns. Sierra Club Books, 1991.
Principles of Traditional Neighborhood Design (Tape Series)Used as a basic educational tool for planning staff
This series is available for purchase at World Ideas Network at http://www.worldideanet.org/win/winindex.nsf go to The Store and Videos Livable Neighborhoods, Community Design Code, Western Australia Ministry for PlanningListed below are the basic planning approach in an outline. The full report is the best guidebook for how to practically apply the principles of new urbanism to the planning process.
The full report "Liveable Neighbourhoods Community Design Code" can be accessed at http://www.planning.wa.gov.au// ON THEIR Planning in Progress page. Moving into the Future by Understanding the Past: Innovations in PlanningNOTE: This is an overview of the integrated application of new urbanism to the Orlando planning program. Often the best way to build the future is to fully understand the past. Too often planners have taken the position that the only new idea is an idea that hasn’t been tried before. It is refreshing and critical that we have once again began to analyze and study what has historically made cities successful, livable, and yes even sustainable over the long period. Orlando has re-constituted its planning program to focus on development that is fully sustainable and provides opportunities for all people. At a time of increased frustration with urban sprawl, traffic congestion, and loss of community, Orlando has focused on an agenda that will for the limited planning area enhance existing neighborhoods, encourage the building of complete communities, and focus on providing balance between all elements of town building. Vision. For any community to effectively plan its’ future, basic principles have to be established up front. You have to know where you want to go. Orlando’s philosophy is clearly embedded in its Growth Management Plan. A plan, originally adopted in 1982, based on extensive citizen input has formed the basis for all development decisions the City has taken since that time. Orlando’s vision is clear and has been sustained relative to development options. Orlando remains focused on the six basic principles of its vision. They are:
Implementation of Orlando’s vision is built on two foundational principles. These principles underlie all activities that the City undertakes in each and every planning arena. They are the concepts of sustainable development based upon the principles of traditional neighborhood design. Sustainable Development. Sustainability focuses on integrating physical, social, and economic and environmental elements of development in a way that enhances the natural and built environment. In today’s development terms, sustainable development "adds value" in a meaningful long-term way. This focus requires a more holistic approach to development review and the decision making process. As a result of this focus, the City is in the process of instituting a review procedure, which will allow a more thorough understanding of the long-term implications of development options while at the same time working with the development community to strengthen the final product of community building. Through the use of community sustainability indicators, planning decisions can be made from a more knowledgeable basis and with a better understanding of the long-term impact of decisions. On July 14, 1997, the City entered into a Sustainable Communities Designation Agreement with the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). Through the agreement, the City outlined its commitment to furthering the sustainability of our community. The City’s commitments include:
The City is also participating in a project with DCA to develop a software application that will analyze how a project adds or detracts from sustainability goals via selected indicators. This application will become a powerful tool to use in reviewing development proposals and running scenarios for development options. The software application is a GIS program written in ArcView and can be readily modified for various purposes. Traditional Design. The concepts of sustainability are being instituted through the use of traditional design concepts, Orlando’s second foundational principle. Traditional design principles are at the very heart and soul of our planning approach and the remainder of this paper will provide information on how these design concepts are applied on a day to day basis. The traditional design philosophy focuses on certain specific elements. These include:
Proactive Planning. The most effective way to achieve any planning objective is through the use of proactive planning. By working with the community to define goals and means, specific design objectives can be achieved. Much of the past 3-5 years has been spent in taking the policies and programs of the City’s Growth Management Plan and applying those policies and programs in a systemic, practical, proactive approach through small area sector plans. Whether the planning area is a large annexation area, such as Southeast Orlando (19,300 acres), a prime infill location such as the Orlando Naval Training Center (1200 acres), or an existing redevelopment opportunity such as Parramore Heritage in downtown Orlando, proactive planning can set the proper framework for sustainable development. By working with residents and property owners, the City has focused upon planning to create a totally integrated community. Integrated in the terms of jobs-housing balance, residential shopping and entertainment opportunities, environmental protection, and a balanced transportation frame work. The Southeast Orlando Sector Plan is one of the largest urban planning and development projects ever undertaken by the City of Orlando. The Plan area consists of approximately 19,300 acres located directly adjacent to the Orlando International Airport (OIA). The proximity of the Plan area to the Orlando International Airport is extremely important. The Orlando International Airport is already the 16th busiest airport in the United States and the 25th busiest airport in the world. In addition, the State of Florida has authorized the construction of a high speed rail system linking Tampa, Orlando, and Miami with the hub being the Orlando International Airport. With the Southeast Orlando Sector Plan, the City is proactively formulating a sustainable development strategy to develop this area in a way that builds and strengthens the livability of the entire community. The City of Orlando identified the Southeast Orlando area as a Future Growth Center with the Orlando International Airport as the primary economic and employment generator. The City’s projections indicate a potential for over 13,300 residential units, 2.1 million square feet of retail, 3.3 million square feet of office, 1,950 hotel rooms, 4.7 million square feet of industrial space, and 600,000 square feet of civic/government space to be developed by 2020. By the year 2020, the Plan area could house more than 28,000 residents. A full range of uses, services, amenities and activities are planned in Southeast Orlando to fill the needs of the anticipated population. In order to build and sustain a viable community, development must feature a mixture of land uses that allow for increased accessibility, diversity, and opportunities for social interaction within the context of an integrated amenity framework. Utilizing the neighborhood as the basic community building unit, the City has utilized the experience of Peter Calthorpe, together with localized refinements presented by Miller-Sellen Associates to develop a community framework based on traditional design principles. Through these principles, a hierarchy of places has been proposed, ranging from a Town Center that will serve as the primary destination and job center within the community, to Village and Neighborhood Centers that provide local shopping and civic spaces for residential areas, to airport-related employment districts that include a variety of industrial and office uses. In the Plan area, centers will be compact and walkable, and residential neighborhoods will be defined by public space and activated by locally oriented civic and commercial facilities. The City will also be utilizing design concepts that provide a strong connection between nature and the built environment. The unique environmental characteristics of the Plan area provide an opportunity to pursue an innovative and comprehensive approach to stormwater control by integrating these facilities with parks and open space, pedestrian and bicycle pathways, and wetland protection/wildlife corridors. In order to accomplish the vision for this area, the City of Orlando entered into a partnership with the southeast area property owners, the Greater Orlando Aviation Authority, Orlando Utilities Commission, representatives of other local, regional, and state agencies affected by or having permitting jurisdiction over the project, and representatives of interest groups concerned with building successful communities. The partnership was responsible for master planning and the technical design of infrastructure, developing strategies for the early provision of public facilities such as schools, the preparation of the urban design/land use plan, including development standards and an administrative process to implement the Plan. The Southeast Orlando Sector Plan is intended to establish a development strategy that directs growth away from environmentally sensitive areas and sets the stage for building community in a unique greenfield location. The citizens established a partnership to coordinate development plans and to stimulate and provide a forum to facilitate development. The sector plan process will continue to guide development of this community for the next 20-50 years. Development has been initiated in accordance with this plan. With the closing of the Orlando Naval Training Center (NTC), a major infill redevelopment opportunity within 3 miles of downtown Orlando and Winter Park was created. "How can this 1,100 acre area be rewoven into the community?" and, "What form should it take?" have been major questions that have been answered through the planning process. Envisioning a village that mixes homes with places of work and entertainment, the public-private partnership sets to turn the soon-to-be deserted Navy base into a viable community that complements the surrounding area. The design phase of the redevelopment process began in early 1997. A consultant team headed by A. Nelessen Associates was hired by the City to prepare a detailed Urban Design and Transportation Plan using the approved Base Reuse Plan as a guide. Citizen input was a valued component of the design process. A Visual Preference Survey was conducted to determine the type of development area residents desired for the NTC property. At three different meetings, citizens viewed and rated 240 slides depicting single-family homes, multifamily homes, pedestrian areas, transit possibilities, commercial land uses, offices, streets, parking, signs and civic buildings. The Survey results were presented at an all-day workshop where residents rolled up their sleeves, grabbed markers and put their ideas of how they would like to see the area developed down on paper. At the end of the day, several themes stood out -linking the site with surrounding neighborhoods, providing public access to lakes, using open space to form a network of green throughout the project, creating a vibrant main street, and dispersing automobile traffic through a gridded street network. Using these themes, Nelessen created an Urban Design Plan implementing these ideas through the use of Traditional Neighborhood Design Principles (TND). A complete Concept Plan for the site was created. This Plan provided for balanced long-term growth with approximately 3,000 residential units and over 2,700,000 square feet of office/commercial use at buildout. A pedestrian oriented village center, that included retail, office, and high density residential uses, surrounded by high density residential areas was the focus. The two lakes on the site were cited as public space and an open space corridor linked the lakes with parks and other open space areas, thereby connecting it with wildlife corridors in the surrounding areas. This process not only produced a clear concept of community expectations, but also resulted in a set of design guidelines that could be implemented. The stage was set, the community set the bar and challenged the development sector to come forward and improve on our vision. With a clear vision in mind, the City sought a development team that would understand and implement that vision. Four nationally recognized development teams, representing most main-line national conventional developers were short-listed for simultaneous negotiations. The four teams included such national developers as Post Properties, Pulte Home Corp., Haile Plantation Group, The Arvida Company, The Rouse Company, WCI Communities and Cali Realty Corp. During this period, City staff actually became a part of each of the four development teams; allowing City staff to work with each team, improving the quality of the submissions and explaining the communities objectives. This kept the competition keen and resulted in four very strong redevelopment proposals; any of which, when developed, would achieve the community’s redevelopment objectives. After six weeks of studying the competing development proposals, listening to their presentations and visiting other projects the developers have undertaken, the City chose Orlando NTC Partners. Consistency with the Concept Plan, the experience of the development team and the integration with the natural environment were major factors in selecting this team. The team features Mesirow Stein Real Estate, Inc., Carter & Associates, Atlantic Gulf Communities Corp., David Weekley Homes and Morrison Homes as developers supported by a design team consisting of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, Cooper Carry and Miller-Sellen & Associates, Inc. Demolition of almost all of the 251 buildings on the Base is expected to begin late this summer and take place over 16-24 months. Over the next decade, Orlando Partners will build 788 houses, 570 condominiums, nearly 1,800 apartments, 1.5 million square feet of office space and 350,000 square feet of retail. But more importantly, a community will be built. A community comprised of neighborhoods in the great Orlando tradition. A community, including a village center, built around lakes and wetlands. The Parramore Heritage Renovation (PHR) is a community based campaign to rebuild and strengthen three of Orlando’s downtown westside neighborhoods. The three neighborhoods, Lake Dot/Arlington Heights, Callahan and Holden/Parramore, comprise much of Orlando’s traditional African American community and are among the oldest areas in the city. The neighborhoods contain a mix of residential, commercial and industrial areas and are very close to Orlando’s growing and successful downtown area. There is great potential for PHR to become a vibrant and safe mixed-use community where people can live, work, play and learn. Today, however, the poor physical condition and image of the PHR community is in direct contrast to manicured and secure-feeling downtown Orlando. The Parramore Heritage area is dominated by substandard housing, a low median income, high unemployment, low educational attainment, marginal job opportunities, a high crime rate and an eroded sense of community. The neighborhoods are in trouble and have been for many years. According to the 1990 Census, the population of the Parramore Heritage District is 8,344; 30% of the residents are under the age of 18 and 87% are African Americans. Of the adult residents, 57% have not completed high school; this compares to 22% for the rest of the City. Only 10% of the residents own their own homes, and 73% of the children under the age of 6 live in poverty. The City sponsored an urban design study of the PHR community. Dover/Kohl and Partners, a South Miami urban design firm which specializes in traditional neighborhood design, was hired to work with neighborhood residents and property owners to produce a site specific urban design plan in the Parramore Heritage District. Dover/Kohl conducted three intensive design charettes during which they worked with community residents, property owners and City staff to establish a vision for the design of the PHR community. Charette activities included neighborhood tours, open mike sessions, interviews with stakeholders, brainstorming and drawing solutions and presenting ideas to other participants. The resulting Urban Design Plan was enthusiastically endorsed by community members. The PHR Urban Design Plan is based upon the Basic Neighborhood Design Principles for Parramore. These Basic Principles reflect a vision for PHR that will protect and strengthen its traditional urban neighborhoods. The premise of the plan is that the PHR District should be restored and organized as a series of wards; each ward should have a recognizable center, defined edges and a mix of uses which satisfy most daily needs. Streets are to be friendly and safe for people as well as for automobiles. The redevelopment concepts, design standards, street standards, traffic calming ideas, and strategies for revitalization are all based upon the traditional neighborhood design concepts outlined in these Basic Neighborhood Design Principles. These major planning projects have all had the premise that a clear understanding of the inter-relationships of physical, social, and environmental elements is critically important to establishing a long term sustainable community. Planning Techniques. This planning philosophy has been reinforced through techniques intended to educate the public and better define community objectives. These techniques include training sessions, instructional video, books and a research library available to the public, as well as hands on conferences and workshops with nationally known speakers and consultants. These tools have allowed the community to take ownership of its own planning process. Through the use of processes such as the Visual Preference Survey, original research undertaken by the City’s Planning & Development Department and ongoing training sessions, the City has determined the key elements which go into making sustainable neighborhoods and communities. It is this research that led to the elements of Traditional Neighborhood Design being the technique and tool to implement a sustainable development approach. Christopher Alexander said it best, in A New Theory of Urban Design, which he stated, "Every increment of construction must be made in such a way as to heal the city." There are no insignificant decisions, no incidental choices. The overall approach to community building must be thorough and consistent. Sustainable development practices must go beyond small area or sector planning. They must be integrated into every aspect of community building. Existing procedures must be streamlined through the use of revised transportation standards designed to give balance to alternative transportation modes. A broad use of traffic calming is a means of community building. Integrated stormwater management into recreational and environmental sustainability is critically important. The joint use of public education and recreation opportunities can and should result in better development options. The City has recently completed a study on its Transportation Impact Fees to see what reductions can be undertaken as a result of more integrated development proposals and greater job-housing balance. Our analysis has shown that existing impact fees can be reduced as much as 30% when a more sustainable design approach is implemented. As such, Orlando’s planning approach has focused on implementation, from redesigning its land development regulations to be consistent with Traditional Neighborhood Design components both as a matter of option and a matter of requirement, to examining transportation impact fee schedules, to the process of sector planning itself. Through neighborhood and sector planning, the City has undertaken a fundamental change in its approach to planning--one built on establishing proactive partnerships, anticipating change, identifying positive elements, and on working to put in place the tools, techniques, and vision necessary for achievement. How do we make the system work more effectively? We must find ways to better educate our Planning Commissioners and make it easier for developers to do the right thing. The use of administrative review procedures and clear understandable codes and practices can be successful. One thing that we are implementing is a revised approach to project presentations, which focuses on identifying the key issues of each project proposal that comes before the Planning Commission. Too often we get lost in the details of code compliance and entirely miss that the fundamental purpose of plan review is to improve the quality of the overall environment. So, whether the issue is the need to provide a pedestrian interface, improve the building scale to fit with surrounding development or simply changes to the location and design of the stormwater system. Proper examples with the proper points can be presented to effectively illustrate the design elements that are critical to the project. Summary. Effective communication is important. Develop and stick with a clear set of policies and vision for your community. Educate the professional community and staff to think differently and think proactively. The overall approach that each community takes must be thorough and consistent. Remember there are no small decisions. We must constantly work to find ways to make it easy to do the right thing. Planning-Related Video ListAs detailed below, these videos can be broadcast on local cable access channels. They are a great means of general community education. CA Biodiversity Council
Center for Livable Communities For a detail of the videos please go to our web page at: www.lgc.org. The following videos are allowed for public access:
If you have any questions please call: Karen Cole EcoIQ.com Video programs are distributed by EcoIQTV.com as a public service and have a short and appropriate tagline to that effect. Television or independent producers who request and receive permission to use footage will be asked to include a credit to EcoIQ.com. Our goal is to have high quality programs available dealing with all of the topics related to creating a sustainable future and covered by EcoIQ.com. These topics include: • Sustainability • Land Use • Air & Atmosphere • Water & Wastewater • Energy • Transportation & Communication • Solid Waste & Recycling • Toxic & Hazardous Materials • Pollution Prevention • Green Design & Building • Urban Greening • Conserving the Built Environment Walkable Communities What are your publishing rights? You are entitled to unlimited publishing and training use of all images. However, you are not entitled to re-sell our images, or to use them to promote a product.
Less Traffic Craig Anderson [craig@lesstraffic.com] "Of course you can show them! Thanks for asking. Craig"
Exploring the magic world of place, this video is presented in four convenient episodes: Episode 1: The Importance of Place The American Architectural Foundation
Melissa Houghton Livable Oregon AVAILABLE FOR NON-COMMERCIAL USE FROM LIVABLE OREGON FOR $15.00 EACH: YOU CAN BROADCAST, BUT NOT DISTRIBUTE.
WE’D BE HAPPY TO SELL YOU COPIES OF THESE FOR REPRODUCTION/PROCESSING COSTS: YOU CAN BROADCAST, BUT NOT DISTRIBUTE.
GET THESE FROM THE INTERNATIONAL DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION IN WASHINGTON, DC
TALK TO 1000 FRIENDS OF OREGON (503-497-1000):
CONTACT DUANY PLATER-ZYBERK IN MIAMI (this is a great video. you should try to get it!):
PROBABLY AVAILABLE FROM THE METROPOLITAN SERVICE DISTRICT IN PORTLAND
PROBABLY AVAILABLE FROM CITIZENS FOR SENSIBLE TRANSPORTATION IN PORTLAND
Brian D. Scott, President
Metro Regional Services (Portland, OR) Gina Whitehill-Baziuk
Author and Copyright InformationCopyright 2001 by Author Richard C. Bernhardt, FAICP, CNU |