Planning Commissioners Journal

Now Available: Our Summer Issue

Planning Commissioners Journal subscribers: our Summer issue is now available. Subscribers should receive their copies the first week of August. If you currently receive a single-copy subscription, remember that additional subscriptions are available for just $12 each/year. Call us for any changes you'd like to make: 802.864.9083. Not yet a subscriber to the PCJ? Subscribe now, and start with our Summer issue. You can also call us to request an invoice.
Contents of our Summer 2010 issue
	Turning Downtowns Around: Business Improvement Districts by Beth Humstone One of the key tools used to strengthen downtowns is the business improvement district. A look at how BIDs work and what they're doing to address today's downtown challenges.
Enjoying Each Others' Company by Wayne Senville Learning from a downtown BID that manages a park in the heart of New York City.
	Integrating Physical, Economic, & Fiscal Considerations in Community Planning by Brett Sheckler and Brian Murphy Too often local fiscal and economic development policies fail to mesh with comprehensive plan goals. How a more integrated approach to planning can better align a community's policy objectives.
Coping with Economic Meltdown by Gwendolyn Hallsmith What role can a planning commission play in jump starting the local economy? Half the battle is recognizing that collective action is possible. The second in a series of columns by Hallsmith.
	The Wise Economy by Della Rucker, AICP, CEcD Unless communities can find better ways to handle change, they're unlikely to succeed economically.
New Ways to Weigh Economy vs. Environment by Dave Stauffer A longstanding debate is again heating up over whether we should favor job creation and economic gain over environmental protection and public health.
	Civic Responsibility by Ric Stephens Should we be focusing more on responsible citizenry and less on complex codes?
Smoothing the Rocky Road by Jim Segedy, Ph.D., FAICP and Lisa Hollingsworth-Segedy, AICP Planning commissions often struggle with group dynamics when making decisions on difficult issues. A look at some ways to work better together.
	Dollars and Sense by Carolyn Braun, AICP Should planners consider the impact of regulations on property values?
Recent Back Issues:	Special Focus Issues:
Spring 2010: Planning for Housing Choices | Drafting Clear Ordinances: Dos and Don'ts | 21st Century Transportation Planning Challenges | Think Regionally, Act Locally | and more	Winter 2010: How to Deal With Contentious Public Hearings -- suggestions & warnings from planners across the U.S.
Fall 2009: Zoning for Religious Institutions | Stand by Your Plan | Public Transportation in Rural Communities | Where's Art in Planning? | and more	Winter 2006: Bright Ideas: 21 creative planning-related ideas & programs you should know about
Summer 2009: Libraries at the Heart of Our Communities | Learn to Speak So People Will Listen | Are We There Yet? | Circle the USA Reports | and more	Fall 2005: This Land Is Your Land: on "takings" and property rights, and how planners can respond
Spring 2009: Getting the Density You Want | Growing Safer: Improving Roadways for Everyone | Dialing for Citizens | Learning to Enjoy Your Service on the Commission | and more	Fall 2004: Back to School for Planners: on the impacts of school location, and the relationship between planning and school boards
Winter 2009: Managing Stormwater Runoff: A Green Infrastructure Approach | Taking Low Impact Development from Research to Regulations | The ABC's of Transit-Oriented Development | and more	Spring 2004: Sphere of Influence: water and its impacts
Fall 2008: Pattern Books: A Planning Tool | GIS & Planning | Where Do We Want to Go? | and more	Fall 2003: Planning for Historic Preservation: an introduction to historic preservation planning
Summer 2008: Greenways | Developing at the Edge | An Introduction to Charrettes | and more	Winter 2002: Opening the Door: planning for affordable housing
Spring 2008: Car Sharing | Revisiting Ex Parte Contacts | Chairing the Commission | and more	Spring 2000: The Promise of America: an historical look at 10 successes & 10 failures that having affected America's cities

Y is for Youth

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville:

We're posting weekly installments of Laurence Gerckens' Planning ABC's, previously published in the PCJ. You can also find links at the end of each post to related articles we've published. If you don't want to wait for each installment, you can order & download the complete publication, from Automobiles to Zoning.

Automobile | Budget | Comp Plan | Design | Ecology | Farmland | Growth Management | Historic Preservation | Inclusionary | Justice | Knowledge | Land Subdivision | Maps | Neighborhood | Open Space | Public Health & Safety | Quiet | Regional Planning | Sustainable | Takings | Urban Sprawl | Vision | Water | X-rated Uses

---

Concerns for the health and safety of children were central components of ideal urban structure theories of the early twentieth century. Ebenezer Howard's Garden City, promoted in his book To morrow, a Peaceful Path to Real Reform (1898), consisted of six "neighborhood units" bounded by through-traffic streets, each with a central elementary school located just a few blocks from the furthest residence. Forest Hills Gardens, Long Island, New York (1910+), was the first American test of this schoolchild-focused neighborhood idea. See N is for Neighborhood.

The culture shock of World War I brought on not only the wild excesses of the Jazz Age of the 1920s, but also a heightened perception of youth as the promise and salvation of the future. In the planned neighborhood developments of the 1920s, elementary schools were centrally located within easy walking distance of their student population.

The 1920s was also the first decade to feel the severe negative impact of the automobile, with thousands of school-age children being killed by motorists. In response, there was a movement to reduce or eliminate all through-traffic in new suburban developments. At Radburn (in the Borough of Fair Lawn, New Jersey) this emphasis on child safety resulted in the total separation of vehicular and pedestrian pathways. Here elementary-school-age children could walk from home to school through center-block parks without walking along or across a street.

The educational and recreational needs of older children were provided for in the 1920s in the siting of large, architecturally impressive, central high schools and their organized sports fields. These schools became integral components of town and city centers. High-school-age children thus had after-school access (either by foot or by electric trolley car or rubber-tired bus systems) to downtown or "Main Street," where the retail shops, theaters, and other places of amusement were located.

With the explosive unplanned suburban sprawl of the 1950s and the decades that followed, concern for the life patterns of elementary-school and high-school age children became less evident. Safe local walk-in elementary schools, no longer viable with the lower densities resulting from the advent of large-lot residential zoning (as well as reduced family size), were abandoned in favor of more far-flung locations. New high-school facilities were often located on large tracts of open space at the perimeter of the community, often accessible only by school bus or automobile.

There are signs of a reversal in this decades long trend, as proponents of "New Urbanism" and "Smart Growth" advocate for higher density residential areas, permitting reclamation of the walk-in local elementary school, and increased provision of transit service, enabling older students to access central areas of the community without need for their own car.

The growing number of "safe routes to school" programs also highlight a renewed interest in enabling young people to walk or bike to school. These programs are not only designed to provide health and safety benefits, but to better connect children with their communities and with the natural environment.

---

For more on schools, young people, and planning, see the following articles from the Planning Commissioners Journal:

Safe Routes to School

School Sprawl

Back to School for Planners

Breach the Wall of Separation

Fresh Eyes

Young Visionaries Make Good Planners

---

Text by Laurence C. Gerckens, FAICP. Illustration by Paul Hoffman.
Text & illustration copyright Champlain Planning Press, Inc. | contact: pcjoffice@gmail.com

X is for X-rated Uses

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville:

We're posting weekly installments of Laurence Gerckens' Planning ABC's, previously published in the PCJ. You can also find links at the end of each post to related articles we've published. If you don't want to wait for each installment, you can order & download the complete publication, from Automobiles to Zoning.

Automobile | Budget | Comp Plan | Design | Ecology | Farmland | Growth Management | Historic Preservation | Inclusionary | Justice | Knowledge | Land Subdivision | Maps | Neighborhood | Open Space | Public Health & Safety | Quiet | Regional Planning | Sustainable | Takings | Urban Sprawl | Vision | Water

---

There are a number of land uses that, although legal, are almost universally considered to be poor neighbors. These include sex-related businesses (such as "adult" book stores, "exotic" dance studios, and "strip tease" theaters), as well as uses ranging from sewage treatment plants and garbage dumps to feed lots and poultry farms. In recent years the acronym "LULUs" has caught on to describe these "Locally Unwanted Land Uses."

Local governments have been especially active in combating sex businesses. While the U.S. Supreme Court has held that sex businesses, such as adult book stores, cannot be totally excluded from a community, the Court has left municipalities free to tightly regulate their location. [See City of Renton v. Playtime Theatres; for analysis: Terence Boga, Esq., Zoning Adult Entertainment Businesses]. Most communities have responded by providing a limited number of zoning districts within which adult businesses can be sited (though almost always as conditional uses).

Adult businesses are invariably prohibited from locating within specified distances of schools, churches, parks, and other places of public assembly. In addition, zoning ordinances often include conditions such as screening the use and its parking facility from view from surrounding properties and public thoroughfares.

Early American land use controls often focused on what might be considered the "X-rated" land uses of their day: fat trying plants, tar boiling facilities, dead animal disposal lots, slaughter houses, garbage dumps, and industrial production facilities. The principal issue was the location of these uses in relation to residential areas and places of public congregation. The most common local government response was to isolate all such uses, allowing them only in limited geographic areas, identified as "industrial" zones.

Interestingly, however, early 20th century as "model" zoning ordinances did not prohibit offices, retail sales, or even residential uses, from locating within industrial zones. The justification for this, in theory, was that if the owners and occupants didn't mind having "X-rated" uses for neighbors, they should not be barred from locating in such zones. As the 20th century wore on, however, zoning codes increasingly came to prohibit business and residence uses in industrial zones.

In lieu of zoned isolation, protection from the negative effects of such uses can be accomplished through use of "performance" controls (or standards). Such controls involve setting measurable maximum standards for perimeter impacts, such as light, sound, smell, sight, vibration, and traffic. Many uses now allowed only in industrial zones have virtually no negative impacts on surrounding uses (or have impacts that could well be addressed through good site design and buffers). Yet most communities still adhere to the principle of zoned isolation formulated almost a century ago.

Public discussion of where LULUs are to be located inevitably brings out hordes of NIMBYs espousing "Not In My Back Yard!" Yet, many of the uses generating NIMBY opposition are essential to the community. These include garbage and trash disposal, as well as sewage treatment facilities. 

NIMBYism is most commonly followed by PIOTism, "Put It Over There" (in HIS yard), the "there" commonly being in other communities or in or near lower-income neighborhoods. Some have suggested (undoubtedly as a hypothetical fantasy!) that if each residential neighborhood had to treat and dispose its own waste within its own geographic confines, we would very quickly have effective recycling and resource conservation programs.

---

For more on related topics, see the following articles from the Planning Commissioners Journal:

Zoning Adult Entertainment Businesses

A NIMBY Collection of Articles (including "A Nose for NIMBYs" and "Is Your Community Being Invaded by NIMBYs?").

---

Text by Laurence C. Gerckens, FAICP. Illustration by Paul Hoffman.
Text & illustration copyright Champlain Planning Press, Inc. | contact: pcjoffice@gmail.com

W is for Water

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville:

We're posting weekly installments of Laurence Gerckens' Planning ABC's, previously published in the PCJ. You can also find links at the end of each post to related articles we've published. If you don't want to wait for each installment, you can order & download the complete publication, from Automobiles to Zoning.

Automobile | Budget | Comp Plan | Design | Ecology | Farmland | Growth Management | Historic Preservation | Inclusionary | Justice | Knowledge | Land Subdivision | Maps | Neighborhood | Open Space | Public Health & Safety | Quiet | Regional Planning | Sustainable | Takings | Urban Sprawl | Vision

Prior to the 1750s, water was provided to residences in America by onsite wells or by water sellers who went door-to-door delivering water from nearby rivers or springs. 

Although Bethlehem, Pennsylvania can lay claim to the first pumped and piped water system in America (1754), it was not until 1801 that Philadelphia completed the first major community-wide waterworks. 

Philadelphia constructed its system largely in response to devastating epidemics in 1793 and 1798. In fact, epidemics (coupled with the need to control fires in dense urban centers), precipitated the development of many municipal water systems.

Until the 19th century, individual residential cesspools and the pail system for removal of waste from privy pits were the predominant means for waste collection and removal. The introduction of the water closet and piped water supply resulted in overflowing private cesspools. This motivated construction of community-wide collection systems to carry away sewage to rivers and streams. Unfortunately, this remedy often shifted the pollutants to the water intakes of communities downstream.

Solutions emerged in the development of filtration systems. The first slow sand filters for sewage were initiated in Poughkeepsie, New York in 1870. 

The next step forward, the intermittent filtration of sewage on sand beds (permitting air to enter initiating biological action and producing a clear and odorless effluent), was first used in a municipal system in Reading, Pennsylvania in 1908. 

By World War I, most of the largest cities in America had water filtration systems, chemical water treatment facilities, and sewage filtration plants. Nevertheless, until 1940 more than half of America's communities failed to treat their sewage in any way before dumping it into a river or stream.

Communities tend to grow upriver from the location of their original sewage outfall. The down river location of sewage outfalls generally attracts undesirable neighbors such as garbage dumps, feed lots, and heavy industrial uses. With sewer systems being gravity-driven, "better residences" sought sewer-served high ground upstream to avoid sewage odors and undesirable nearby uses.

Cities sought water sources often a considerable distance away. Between 1905 and 1914 New York City built huge reservoirs in the Catskill Mountains, some 100 miles to the north. Around the same time, Los Angeles undertook the enormous Owens Valley Project, carrying water through a 240-mile aqueduct. The Owens Valley project also reflected the truism that whoever controls the water supply of a region controls its potential for growth.

Since most early city centers were located along waterways, flooding was a regular threat. Large-scale regional flood prevention served as a primary motivation for regional planning in America. See R is for Regional Planning. At the local level, many modern subdivision control ordinances include requirements for the retention and slow release of storm waters in new developments. This has minimized flood damage to neighboring and downstream properties.

Federal and state clean water laws have helped ensure the supply of clean and safe drinking water. One way has been through the protection and preservation of wetlands and aquifer recharge areas, an approach that has also provided valuable refuges for migrating waterfowl.

---

For more on water-related topics, see the following articles from the Planning Commissioners Journal:

Emerging Water Shortages Are No Mirage

Overlay Zoning to Protect Surface Waters

---

Text by Laurence C. Gerckens, FAICP. Illustration by Paul Hoffman.
Text & illustration copyright Champlain Planning Press, Inc. | contact: pcjoffice@gmail.com

V is for Vision

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville:

We're posting weekly installments of Laurence Gerckens' Planning ABC's, previously published in the PCJ. You can also find links at the end of each post to related articles we've published. If you don't want to wait for each installment, you can order & download the complete publication, from Automobiles to Zoning.

Automobile | Budget | Comp Plan | Design | Ecology | Farmland | Growth Management | Historic Preservation | Inclusionary | Justice | Knowledge | Land Subdivision | Maps | Neighborhood | Open Space | Public Health & Safety | Quiet | Regional Planning | Sustainable | Takings | Urban Sprawl

---

Many of America's early planners were people of vision whose creative imaginations continue to make our cities livable and memorable. 

In 1791, Pierre Charles L'Enfant envisioned an immense, world-class national capital on the Potomac. 

L'Enfant's plan included broad diagonal avenues cutting through a grid of streets. Key intersections of avenues and streets provided settings for monuments and fountains.

In 1901, a team of planners led by Daniel Hudson Burnham undertook a vast extension of the original plan, continuing L'Enfant's central axis to the west, and reorienting it to pass through the Washington Monument. This created sites for the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials at the end of grand axes.

Without vision in carrying the L'Enfant Plan forward, the Washington Mall would have continued to be cluttered with private interest activities, and the Washington Monument would be overlooking a vast Potomac River mud flat (referred to by turn-of-the-century politicians as "that Godforsaken swamp!").  Instead, the Mall today provides a wonderful heart to our capital city, while the mud flat is parkland providing the sites for the Lincoln Memorial and Reflecting Pools, and more recently, the Vietnam and Korean Veterans Memorials. Planners of vision see potential; those without vision see only the swamp.

In the 1850's, Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. and Calvert Vaux built on the creative vision of New York City's civic leaders who had purchased (for $5,000,000!) a site for an immense "central park." Olmsted and Vaux planned for the recreation and public health needs of a future city of millions, designing a park that quickly became a national model. Central Park provided for separation of traffic types, huge "natural" greens, and the careful placement of perimeter walls, interior depressions, and tree plantings to assure the isolation of visitors within this "Greensward" from the city immediately beyond. See also "O is for Open Space."

The Plan of Columbus, Ohio is an excellent example of the value of vision in planning (as well as how unforeseen events often permit visions initially deemed "impractical" to be capable of implementation in unexpected ways). This 1908 plan envisioned a new urban open space lined with public buildings, leading downhill from the State Capitol, terminating at a new armory located at the opposite side of the Scioto River. The plan was immediately denounced as too grandiose and impossible to realize. But the principal visions of the plan were shortly made realizable by fire and flood: the old Columbus City Hall burned and the Scioto River flooded, destroying derelict riverside industrial buildings.

The result: A new city hall was built on cleared ground next to the Scioto River. The river was widened and gradually lined with public buildings. This new river-focused open space ended at the restored Civil War Era Ohio State Armory. In this manner, the grand vision of the 1908 Plan was realized by turning the original concept 90 degrees, substituting city hall for the state capitol, a historic armory for a new one, and water for grassed esplanade. Indeed, the Columbus Civic Center was ultimately realized at a scale more than nine times as large as proposed in 1908!

In more modern times, visionary planning can be seen in the 1962 town plan for Reston, Virginia, a brilliantly conceived vision of "urbanism in the countryside;" in the 1979 Capital Center Plan for Providence, Rhode Island, which set the framework for the revitalization of that city and for such amenities as the recently completed Waterplace Park; and in comparable planning efforts across the country. Vision is imagination capable of inspiring planners and builders to respect the works of today, while moving forward with greater visions of the community of tomorrow.

---

Text by Laurence C. Gerckens, FAICP. Illustration by Paul Hoffman.
Text & illustration copyright Champlain Planning Press, Inc. | contact: pcjoffice@gmail.com

Getting Groceries?

What better way to do your grocery shopping, especially at your local farmers market, than by using our attractive canvas tote bag -- now available. The tote bag includes Paul Hoffman's dramatic Farm to Community graphic on both sides of the bag. [Click on image of bag to view it at larger size].

Order the tote bag this month for just $19.95 and we'll include free shipping. What's more, we'll email you a complimentary pdf of our Farm to Community back issue (a $16.75 value).

Sorry: but no additional subscriber discount on this special offer.

note: local government orders can request to be invoiced; simply call our office at: 802.864.9083 (best between 10am and 2pm Eastern time).

A Welcome Package for New Planning Commissioners: Our July Special Offer

Our July special offer: a terrific Welcome Package for new (and even not so new) members of your planning commission. All the items shown below are included. What's more, we're offering this Welcome Package at a substantial discount -- just $44.95. This is well over 50% off the $120.75 cost if you purchased the items individually. Use the links below for more details about each item. But you must return to this page to order to receive the special discount pricing.

Here's what you'll receive:

-- a copy of Elaine Cogan's Now that You're on Board: How to Survive ... and Thrive ... as a Planning Commissioner:

-- plus our latest reprint collection, Come to Order! Getting Organized for Business. This includes a number of articles especially useful for new planning board members.

-- plus three back issues of the Planning Comm'rs Journal: Getting the Density You Want; Pattern Books for Communities; and Managing Stormwater:

-- plus our newest product: a tote bag with Paul Hoffman's delightful illustration from our Farm to Community issue.

Purchased individually, these publications and the tote bag would cost you $120.75. For this monthly special only, you can receive all these items for just $44.95. Note: given the steep discount, no additional subscriber discount is available on this special offer. We encourage you to stock up on this Welcome Package so you'll have them on hand for any new commissioners you'll have over the next year or two. What's more, shipping is just $5.00 -- regardless of how many Welcome Package sets you order. If you're a local government and don't order online and/or need to be invoiced, call us at: 802-864-9083 (best between 10am and 2pm Eastern time).

Fit for Framing

We've heard from many of you -- and you can now (finally!) purchase some of the outstanding cover drawings that illustrator Paul Hoffman has prepared for the Planning Commissioners Journal. 

These prints will look terrific on a wall in your office or home. Need to find something special for a planner you know? Looking for a great way to say "thank you" to a retiring planning commissioner for his or her service? A framed print would make a prized gift.

You can also order the designs on note and gift cards, tote bags, mousepads, and t-shirts.

Paul has illustrated every one of our 78 -- and counting -- covers since 1991. 

We're starting our online store by making a sampling of a dozen of his cover illustrations available. Take a look below, then go to our page on the Cafe Press web site. 

By the way, Cafe Press does an excellent job in mounting and framing the illustrations -- we know, as we now have several of Paul's illustrations on our office walls. 

Here's a reduced size screenshot of our Cafe Press page; click on the screenshot to go to the actual page:

Go to our Cafe Press site

If there's interest, we'll add more of Paul's cover art. So if you have a favorite Planning Commissioners Journal cover, let us know.

One way of seeing all the covers Paul has done, albeit at low-resolution, is by browsing through our collection of back issues -- also a great way of scanning the more than 400 articles we've published since 1991.

U is for Urban Sprawl

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville:

We're posting weekly installments of Laurence Gerckens' Planning ABC's, previously published in the PCJ. You can also find links at the end of each post to related articles we've published. If you don't want to wait for each installment, you can order & download the complete publication, from Automobiles to Zoning.

Automobile | Budget | Comp Plan | Design | Ecology | Farmland | Growth Management | Historic Preservation | Inclusionary | Justice | Knowledge | Land Subdivision | Maps | Neighborhood | Open Space | Public Health & Safety | Quiet | Regional Planning | Sustainable | Takings

---

The term "urban sprawl" commonly denotes a condition of unplanned, uncoordinated, and generally low density development spreading outward from the city center.

Sprawl is not just a modern phenomenon. In a sense, American sprawl began with the horse drawn omnibus of the 1830s, which permitted the more well-to-do to escape the center city for more country-like surroundings, where they could reside in detached homes bounded by small grass plots and gardens. 

This outward dispersion accelerated with the widespread arrival of the steam railroad in the 1850s. Suburban villages sprang up along the rail lines. The introduction of the electric trolley car in the 1880s permitted an even larger segment of the population to leave the center city behind, as trolley car lines followed major streets to the edges of the city.

The suburban expansions of the late 19th century, however, did not totally encircle the city. Being rail-based, the overall pattern was one of a few routes radiating out from the city center (where commerce and industry was still located), with residential development focused within a few blocks of either side of the transit line. This left huge swaths of open space between the rail lines.

The nature of American sprawl changed radically with coming of the inexpensive automobile in the 1920s. No longer limited to close proximity to major streets and trolley lines, low density development expanded to previously inaccessible areas, often "leapfrogging" over undeveloped areas to more distant locations. Independent suburban villages, with their own land subdivision, planning, and zoning authorities, grew rapidly. See also "A is for Automobile."

Land speculation drove the engine of regional development. Lacking regional government planning and controls, each of the plethora of small units of local government legislated as it saw fit to meet its own interests. Often this included policies designed to exclude the less well-to-do.

The Great Depression and World War II dampened the pace of residential sprawl. However, the construction in outlying locations of large-scale, single-story war industry plants in the early 1940s led to the suburban dispersion of what had been central-city-focused production industry.

Of particular importance, the need for the rapid construction of war worker housing led Edgar Kaiser, on the West Coast, and William Levitt, on the East Coast, to develop the mass production of homes (before, home construction had been in the hands of individual craftsmen, and often produced one house at a time). By the late 1940s and early 1950s, this production technology allowed for the large-scale construction of hundreds of single-family homes at a time, with "cookie-cutter" tracts extending over thousands of acres.

Federal and state programs, especially highway construction and FHA mortgage-insured loans, fueled this growth. Suburban development spread with little overall coordination and scant attention to long-term consequences. Primarily dependent on the private automobile, it quickly generated both traffic congestion requiring immense sums for its temporary amelioration and perimeter regional shopping centers accessible only by car.

By the end of the 20th century, sprawl had reshaped metropolitan areas across America. While central cities still remained a focal point for government, financial, and large corporation day-time office workers (and night-time theater goers), they had been drained of newer production industries, and of middle- and upper-income residents. As development continued to disperse, a new demarcation even emerged: inner suburbs versus outer suburbs, with inner suburbs starting to face a loss of economic vitality as commerce and population relocated to even more peripheral locations. Ominously, America's entire sprawling, auto-centric development pattern remained precariously dependent on foreign oil.

---

For more on related issues, see the following articles from the Planning Commissioners Journal:

Two Perspectives on Sprawl

Stopping Sprawl by Growing Smarter

The Three Myths of Growth

School Sprawl

---

Text by Laurence C. Gerckens, FAICP. Illustration by Paul Hoffman.
Text & illustration copyright Champlain Planning Press, Inc. | contact: pcjoffice@gmail.com

Summer's About Here

 From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

With the arrival of Summer we're going to be slowing the pace of postings here on the PlannersWeb, including the Friday video shorts. 

We'll be wrapping up our installments of Larry Gerckens' Planning ABC's over the next few weeks -- with U is for Urban Sprawl; followed by V is for Vision; W is for Water; X is for X-Rated Uses; Y is for Youth; and Z is for Zoning. 

We'll be posting occasional reports -- including a look at a very unique walkway spanning the Hudson River in New York, and an announcement later this month about the availability of some very special art work that -- we believe -- every planner and planning commissioner will want to have displayed on their wall.

T is for Takings

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville:

We're posting weekly installments of Laurence Gerckens' Planning ABC's, previously published in the PCJ. You can also find links at the end of each post to related articles we've published. If you don't want to wait for each installment, you can order & download the complete publication, from Automobiles to Zoning.

Automobile | Budget | Comp Plan | Design | Ecology | Farmland | Growth Management | Historic Preservation | Inclusionary | Justice | Knowledge | Land Subdivision | Maps | Neighborhood | Open Space | Public Health & Safety | Quiet | Regional Planning | Sustainable

---

No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation."
-- The Constitution of the United States, Fifth Amendment

State and local governments have long been empowered to acquire private property for public purposes so long as compensation is paid. However, in the 1920s, cities and towns began using land subdivision controls to require the "dedication" (giving) of streets to the public -- without compensation -- when land was subdivided.

Courts uniformly found no "taking" requiring compensation in such situations. They pointed out that there was no public coercion since it was the landowner who initiated the request to subdivide. They also stressed that the dedication involved only a portion of a landowner's property and did not deprive the owner of substantially all its value. This rationale was followed in the 1930s to uphold subdivision requirements for the dedication of parkland.

The courts also upheld a broad array of land use regulations designed to protect public health and safety. While these regulations did not involve the direct public use of private property, they did have significant impacts by limiting the extent and density of development -- and precluding potentially more lucrative land uses. Among the early restrictions upheld by the Supreme Court: building height limits; bans on locating certain uses in or near residential areas; and building setback lines. Most notably, the Court upheld comprehensive zoning -- laying the way for the explosive growth in local zoning across the country. Euclid v. Ambler (1926).

After more than four decades of silence, the Supreme Court returned to the land use arena in 1978. At issue was New York City's historic designation of Grand Central Terminal, which prevented Penn Central from constructing an office tower over the Terminal. 

The Court held there was no "taking," as Penn Central could earn a reasonable return on the existing Terminal, and from development rights the city made transferable to nearby sites. Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City.

Since Penn Central, the Supreme Court has become actively engaged in the review of state and local land use regulations. In general, the Court's rulings have cut back on the land use regulatory powers of state and local governments by:

finding a taking unless the government demonstrates an "essential nexus" (i.e., close link) between the purpose stated in the legislation authorizing the government's action and the particular constraint on private property. Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 1987.

finding the remedy for a taking caused by government regulation to include the award of damages to the property owner, not just rescission of the law or ordinance. First English Evangelical Church v. County of Los Angeles, 1987.

finding that any dedication of land (i.e., for parkland or green space) required of a property owner through an administrative process, such as the granting of a permit (as opposed to through a legislative process affecting many properties) must be "roughly proportional" to the impacts specifically caused by the new development. Dolan v. City of Tigard, 1994.

However, the Supreme Court has held that a moratorium on development pending completion of a long-range plan does not necessarily result in a taking, especially if the moratorium is of limited duration. Tahoe Sierra Preservation Council v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, 2002.

In the past decade, efforts (mostly unsuccessful) have been made in state legislatures and in Congress to define a "taking" as any public action that reduces property value beyond a specified low percentage, and to require payment by the public for "lost" value above this level. The potential impact of such legislation on the ability of governments to regulate land use is enormous.

---

For more on takings-related issues, see the following articles from the Planning Commissioners Journal:

Taking Aim at Takings Claims

How Far is Too Far?

A Question of Balance

The Supreme Court's Kelo Decision: Good News or Bad News for Downtowns?

---

Text by Laurence C. Gerckens, FAICP. Illustration by Paul Hoffman.
Text & illustration copyright Champlain Planning Press, Inc. | contact: pcjoffice@gmail.com

There's a Good Story Here!

[all photos in this post can be viewed at larger size; just click on the image] 

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

What would Horace Greeley, America's most famous newspaper publisher and editor, think about the changes to the square bearing his name -- looking down from his bronze chair? Probably, "there's a good story here!"

He'd be right. The transformation of Greeley Square from a rundown, orphaned park to a lively, busy place is indeed a good story. It also could serve as Exhibit A in demonstrating the principles highlighted at the recent Project for Public Spaces workshop I attended. 

Some basics first. Greeley Square (like Petrosino Square; see my earlier post) is not square, but rectangular. It's wedged between Broadway and Sixth Avenue, and 32nd and 33rd Streets, close to Macy's, The Empire State Building, and Penn Sation. 

New Yorkers call Greeley Square a "bow tie" park since it is twined with the reverse triangle of Herald Square. Together they take on the shape of a bow tie.

In a posting last week I wrote about the importance of seating and, in particular, the emphasis PPS places on movable chairs. As with many principles of urban space design, this harkens back to observations first made by William H. Whyte: "Chairs enlarge choice: to move into the sun, out of it: to move closer to someone, further away from another. The possibility of choice is as important as the exercise of it." From Whyte's City: Rediscovering the Center.

Even on a short visit to Greeley Square, you can see the benefits of movable chairs, as people arrange the chairs where they like -- alone, in pairs, or in small groups.

The single most important sign of a successful park according to PPS staff is not how pretty it looks from the air, but how active it is on the ground. While there are many important ingredients in helping ensure active use, the one that I kept hearing over and over during the PPS workshop was "good management." As PPS Vice-President Kathy Madden said, "Eighty percent of the success of any space has to do with how it is managed."

This single factor has, in large part, been responsible for the transformation of a growing number of New York City parks. Urban designer Norman Mintz noted that: "Greeley Square used to be a place you did not want to go to. Today, you can be hard pressed to find a place to sit during lunch hour."

Take a one minute walk through Greeley Park (posted on Google videos in 2006):

In Greeley Square, as in a growing number of other New York City parks, a private nonprofit manages the park and programs activities. In Greeley Square's case, it's done by the 34th Street Partnership. 

So what does this mean, on the ground? For one thing: getting many small details right -- details that add up.

How about restrooms you can actually feel comfortable going into? Yes, those flowers were actually in the Greeley Square public restroom when I visited (and, yes, it felt strange taking a photo inside a restroom!).

How about a vending stand where you can not just get a bite to eat, but a delicious sandwich? Great care went into selecting the food vendor, 'wichcraft.

How about a park that's kept nice and clean all the time, not just once a day?

How about all sorts of details, from the design of the trash receptacles to the availability of information for visitors? (Incidentally, the information stand has a big benefit beyond providing maps and fliers, it also provides another pair of eyes on what's happening in the park).

Fred Kent, President of PPS, said that one question that often comes up is how to deal with vagrants or homeless people using the park. His answer: that unless they're causing a disturbance, let them be. As long as the park is well-managed and maintained, it will attract other users. With enough activity, people will see the park as a place welcoming to all.

Who pays for all this? In New York City, as I noted, there's a definite move towards park management being handled by nonprofits. But it's not just in New York, I also reported on this last Summer during a visit to Detroit, and it's a trend nationwide.

Funding sources for park management vary. For the 34th Street Partnership (which manages both Greeley Square and Herald Square under an agreed-upon plan with the City) the primary source of revenue is from special assessments on property within its business improvement district. This is supplemented by income from the food vendors -- another reason why ensuring quality food is important -- and sponsors of events taking place in the park. Revenue from these "supplemental" sources is a much bigger factor in larger spaces like Bryant Park.

As you can see from the 34th Street business improvement district map above (click on it to view it at larger size), the BID is quite large, stretching from Park Avenue to 10th Avenue, and ranging between 30th and 36th Streets. It has a staff of 154, including 63 in sanitation and 36 in security. In 2009, it received $9.3 million in revenue from special assessments on properties within the district. For more details about the 34th Street Partnership BID.

Note: the upcoming Summer issue of the Planning Commissioners Journal features an article on how BIDs work, along with an article providing a closer look at the enormously successful Bryant Park BID. 

For cities, the benefits of strong urban parks are considerable. Not only do they provide pleasant, enjoyable places for residents, shoppers, office workers, and tourists to use, but they are financial catalysts for cities. Indeed, with New York City seeing so many benefits from its resurgent urban parks, it's no surprise that the city officials are among their biggest advocates.

So, as Horace Greeley no doubt would have told you, "there's a good story here!"

 

Give My Regards to Broadway

One of the most remarkable sights in New York City these days is the transformation of Broadway in the Times Square district from a traffic-jammed artery to a car-free zone, where pedestrians reign. I touched on this briefly in my last post -- in how movable chairs are one key element in this changeover.

One of the advocates behind New York City's growing embrace of pedestrian and bicycle-oriented policies is Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan. Listen to her in the following two short video clips. In the first she talks about the changes to Broadway, and how they can serve as a model for New York's other boroughs. In the second video, she responds to questioners in Los Angeles about how to shape city transportation policies.

Our June Special Offer - A Great Collection of Articles on Transportation Planning to Download

Hannah Twaddell, a Project Manager with the Renaissance Planning Group, is one of the leading progressive voices for transportation planning in America. She is also an outstanding writer, and does a great job in boiling down sometimes complex topics so that they can be readily understood by citizen planners. For more about Hannah; and for her resume. This month's special will enable you to download 15 of Hannah's articles from the Planning Commissioners Journal in a single, searchable pdf file.

Download all 15 articles by Hannah Twaddell from the Planning Commissioners Journal (44 pages total). Scroll down for details. Use the article title links for details and excerpts. Individual articles can also be separately ordered & downloaded; but there are substantial savings in downloading all 15 articles in a single, searchable pdf file from this page. We ask that you honor the license provisions noted below. If you order a single copy license, and then decide you'd like to make multiple copies of the articles, or share the pdf, please call our office at: 802.864.9083 to pay for the multiple copy license (less what you already paid for the single copy license). Thank you. $16.75 -- order & download all 15 articles; license to store one copy on your computer and/or print out for your own use. $57.75 -- order & download all 15 articles; license to print/store up to 20 copies of each article (contact us for pricing on additional use). Planning Comm'rs Journal subscribers: take an additional 25% off the price of your order! Activate your discount, then use your browser's back button to return to this page. Not a subscriber: you can subscribe now and qualify for the discount.

Transportation Planning Topics  by Hannah Twaddell	see our conversation with Hannah Twaddell about her article "Let's Plan on Walking" -- For more about Hannah; and for her resume.
21st Century Transportation Planning Challenges	As the 21st century dawns, we need to plan for our cities and towns in ways that bring people and places closer together and provide more travel choices.
Planning for Public Transportation in Rural Communities	There’s a strong need for public transportation in rural communities -- with benefits both for individuals and local economies.
Growing Safer: Improving Roadways for Everyone	Transportation planners know how critical it is to assess safety issues. But what can we do if a strategy to improve safety for one group of roadway users, such as drivers, has the unintended effect of decreasing safety for others, such as pedestrians? Some ways to make roadways safer for everyone.
The ABC’s of TOD: Transit-Oriented Development	Transit is making a remarkable comeback. But one of the most intriguing aspects is that it is being helped along by -- and helping to stimulate -- new development close by transit stops. A look how TOD works, word-by-word.
Happy Trails: Greenways for Everyone	Across the country, citizens are increasingly calling for improved and expanded multi-use trails, both for recreational and commuting purposes. Transportation planner Hannah Twaddell outlines a “four-step path” to developing a successful greenway trail.
When Connecting Point A to Point B, What Happens to Point C? Considering Bypass Highways	Key questions to ask when thinking about the need for a bypass highway.
Fitting Roadways to Community Needs: A Look at the ITE Urban Thoroughfares Report	The product of five years of hard work, a recent report by the Institute of Transportation report provides a much needed approach to integrating the transportation objectives of roadways with design considerations that take into account the built environment and pedestrian needs.
Let's Plan on Walking	Cities and towns are increasingly recognizing that walkability plays a key role in achieving broader economic and social goals, such revitalizing urban centers, creating a sense of place in suburbs, and reclaiming the attractiveness of small towns. A report on the growing interest in walkable communities.
This Little Piggy Went to Market: The Journey from Farm to Table	The food we consume literally travels the globe. We can now get just about any food we want, at any time of year, if we are willing to pay the costs -- financial and environmental -- of transporting it. A look at how food moves.
Corridors Through Our Communities	From the old riverboat world of the Mississippi to the crowded arterials of today's cities and towns, transportation corridors have played a critical role in American life. Why planning for our corridors makes sense.
No Such Thing As Free Parkings	A look at some of the provocative ideas in a much discussed book by economist and planner Donald Shoup.
Making the Connection	The benefits of "street connectivity" have received growing attention from planners. Hannah Twaddell looks at what's behind this interest in interconnected streets.
The Future is Now: Mobility & Seniors	A look at mobility concerns facing our aging population.
Safe Routes to School	Safe Routes to School programs are being implemented in communities across the country, focusing on enabling more school age children to safely walk or bike to school.
The Deep Mystery of Traffic Congestion	Transportation planner Hannah Twaddell explores "The Deep Mystery" of traffic congestion in her overview of "transportation demand management" strategies.

Please Be Seated

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

We do it dozens of times a day. During nice weather, we often do it in the park. And we're careful where we do it, often scouting out a location that seems just right for us to .... sit. But how much do planners and urban designers know about our backsides?

Noted open space researcher, the late William H. Whyte, found this an overlooked, but quite important, matter. "A dimension that is truly important," he wrote, "is the human backside ... It is a dimension that architects ignore."

Why is knowing about our backsides so important? Because, as Whyte observed through his field observations: 

"Rarely will you find a ledge or bench that is deep enough to be sittable on both sides. ... Our recommended depth was arrived at quite pragmatically. The minimum-depth ledge we came across that was consistently used on both sides was thirty inches deep. ... For a few additional inches of depth, then, a developer can double the amount of his ledge-sitting space." While Whyte noted that this wouldn't necessarily double the number of people sitting: "The benefit of the additional space is social comfort. There will be more room for groups and individuals to sort themselves out, more choice, and more perception of choice." From City: Rediscovering the Center, p. 115.

One of the many fascinating things talked about at the Project for Public Space's "Streets as Places" workshop was the importance of seating in parks and along sidewalks. Frankly, it wasn't something I had spent much time reflecting on before -- but the message PPS staff conveyed over and over was: it's the details of how people actually use parks and open space that can make a world of difference. And that takes careful observation to learn.

It's clear we care about where we sit. Just think about what factors flash through your mind when you enter, say, your city's downtown park at lunch time looking for a place to eat a sandwich or relax for a few minutes?

Again, here's what William Whyte found: "All things being equal, you can calculate that where pedestrian flows bisect a sittable place, that is where people will most likely sit. And it is not perverse of them. It is by choice that they do." People tend to sit where they can view the action going on, and not in remote corners.

As a planner, you also need to consider what kinds of seating to provide. I was surprised to hear that PPS often advocates the use of movable seating, instead of fixed benches. Why's that? First, because chairs are usually more comfortable than benches. Second, they're less expensive (you can typically buy ten chairs for the cost of one bench). But most importantly, "people can arrange chairs how they like, to sit nearer or farther apart, and move them around to sun or shade." Giving people choices is a big plus.

PPS staff acknowledged that the biggest downside is the possibility of theft of the chairs -- though they note that "this can be reduced when the area is supervised by an attendant or an activity where staff is present." That's something that should be possible in busier downtown parks -- especially those that are well-managed (and I'll return to the importance of park management in my next post). 

Take a look at the photo above of Greeley Square (is it just coincidence that Horace Greeley looks like he's comfortably seated in, at least what used to be, a movable chair?) and of Broadway on the right. Movable chairs are now common in New York City's downtown parks and open spaces. [Click on the photos to view them at larger size.]

As an aside, urban designer Norman Mintz noted that one of the hurdles New York's small urban parks, like Greeley Square, have had to overcome is that maintenance staff like to arrange seating in nice, neat rows; part of their training is to tell them that's not necessary, as people are more comfortable finding (and perhaps moving) a chair that is not so "formally" lined up. 

Benches can also work. A bench in the right location along a sidewalk can be a boon to shoppers and others. Again, PPS staff have learned much through observation, leading to a number of tips and guidelines they provided:

• One mistake is to place benches at regular intervals along a street. Instead, consider locating them where they'll most likely be used: ""places where people wait for rides, taxis, or buses; near food shops; and anywhere that people can watch other people."
• Conversely, don't put seating in ""places where there is little activity, such as in front of banks that close early, buildings without windows, places that are hidden from view or located too far from activity."
• Also very important: keeping benches in good repair. Otherwise "when people see the neglect [they] then make generalizations that influence their perceptions or feelings about the entire downtown."

PPS has also put together guidelines for things like depth of seating, height of bench backs, and the design of bench legs and armrests. Again, guidelines based on years of observation.

If all this sounds too challenging, take heart. As William Whyte wryly noted: "it takes real work to create a lousy place." 

Yet, it can be done! Witness Mercantile Plaza in the heart of downtown St. Louis, which I visited with blogger Steve Patterson on a sunny afternoon a few years ago. As Patterson has noted ""it's more of a vacant hole than a quality urban space ... no seating is provided and sitting on the grass would probably upset the guards."

Of course, seating along sidewalks is also important outside of parks. When combined with food, you have a real winning combination. 

So be sure there are plenty of places in your community where you -- and neighbors, office workers, shoppers, and visitors -- can be seated.

In my next post, we'll stroll over to Greeley Square for a closer look at how one small urban park in New York has been transformed.

[Note: this post was based on notes I took during the April PPS "Streets as Places" workshop, as well as on material from "A Primer on Seating," prepared by PPS staff.]

Coming Next Wednesday ... We Continue the Planning ABC's

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville:

Because of our postings about the Project for Public Spaces workshop the past two weeks, we've had to push back posting the last several installments of Larry Gerckens' Planning ABCs series. They'll resume next week with "T is for Takings." In the meantime, feel free to look at what we've previously posted:

Automobile | Budget | Comp Plan | Design | Ecology | Farmland | Growth Management | Historic Preservation | Inclusionary | Justice | Knowledge | Land Subdivision | Maps | Neighborhood | Open Space | Public Health & Safety | Quiet | Regional Planning | Sustainable

The Other Half of the "Deadly Duo"

In a post last week, I reported on the first half of the "deadly duo" -- and, no, I wasn't referring to rapper Jay-Z. What I was talking about something more important, at least to planners and local officials: level of service standards and travel projections. They're what transportation engineer Gary Toth calls the "deadly duo," since unthinking reliance on them can kill efforts to build strong, vibrant communities.

The first half of the deadly duo, according to Toth, is LOS (that's "level of service" standards for those not familiar with the acronym). Today I want to go over some of his basic arguments about the other half of Toth's deadly duo: travel projections. 

As Toth made clear during a recent Project for Public Spaces workshop, travel projections -- and the models that generate them -- are of critical importance because they set the table for how we plan and design our roadways ... and communities.  

We all know the expression, "garbage in," "garbage out," that shorthand reminder that the quality of the results we get from using data depends on the quality of the data we're relying on. That's also true when thinking about traffic models. So what are some of the warning signs?

For Toth, the first thing to watch out for is growth projections, both for population (which he says often result in overestimations) and for traffic. As Toth explains: "Most [traffic models] ignore changing demographics such as the aging of our population, rising energy prices, ... and societal changes. Most assume that our economy will continue to grow at the same rate as it has over the last 30 years."

But there's an even more important thing to watch out for, Toth warns, models have a built-in bias towards continuation of the status quo. "Without direction or a reason to do otherwise, modelers will likely assume that future growth will occur ... as usual segregated and spread out (sprawl) patterns." Why is this critical? "Because research shows that compact mixed use development can reduce travel by 25% or more." Traffic models, Toth continues, don't consider how we can reshape the direction our communities are heading. 

What's more, by relying on the projections of traffic models that overestimate our need for more or wider roadways, we're making it more difficult to achieve the goal of more walkable, less auto-dependent, communities.

In an article for the Planning Commissioners Journal (available on our web site), noted planning historian Laurence C. Gerckens wrote about the tyranny of projections driven by over-reliance on past trends: 

"The second 'flaw' -- or built in bias -- in the 'classic' planning process lay in the fact that it was premised on the projection or continuation of past trends. In other words, past trends became the policy-bases for the comprehensive plan. As a result, plans rarely reflected any vision for positive change. Instead, they reinforced historic patterns. ... 'Modern' planning processes began not with the acquisition of immense amounts of data, but with the creative visioning of alternative futures -– establishing community goals, alternative patterns of development, and the means of their attainment. ... Responsible planning is a creative art using data from the past and knowledge of interrelationships to create new and better communities for the future."

But what can you as a planner or local official do when faced with traffic projections you believe overestimate future travel demand and fail to take into account the community's vision of its future? Ask hard questions, was Toth's reply. "Challenge growth and buildout numbers, and ask if they adjust for walkability and for increased mixed-use ... listen to the answers, and then ask more questions." 

"Don't let the model tell you how wide your streets should be," Toth continued, "you tell modelers how wide you want your streets to be, and then have them tell you what that will mean in terms of congestion." In other words, remember that you are the policy makers, and the traffic modelers are there to help you understand the impacts of what you want. It's up to you then "to decide what you want to do about any projected congestion" given your community's vision and goals. 

What's more, Toth concludes, if the model is cheap or faulty, just don't use it.

[Note: in putting together this post I drew on both my notes of Gary Toth's comments during the workshop and material in a handout he prepared, "Traffic projections and levels of service targets."]

Note from PCJ Editor Wayne Senville: Are you interested in transportation planning topics? This June, we have a terrific special offer -- you can download 15 articles that transportation planner Hannah Twaddell has written for the Planning Commissioners Journal -- all for a substantially discounted price. Gary Toth calls Hannah one of the top progressive transportation planners in the United States. She's a Project Manager with the Renaissance Planning Group -- and also an outstanding writer who does a great job in boiling down sometimes complex topics so that they can be readily understood by citizen planners. For more about Hannah. Go to our Special Offer page and find out about the 15 articles included in this pdf download.

Pavement into Parks

While the Project for Public Spaces (which I've been reporting on in recent posts) works with communities across the globe, it hasn't forgotten its roots in New York City. In fact, the Big Apple is brewing with pedestrian and bicycle-oriented projects and organizations. This really kicked into high gear in 2006, when the New York City Streets Renaissance (NYCSR) was formed. As described on the StreetFilms blog, the NYCSR was initiated as "a collective effort of non-profit advocacy organizations Transporation Alternatives, the Project for Public Spaces, and The Open Planning Project, the primary goal was to encourage a citywide enlightenment in planning our streets for people and places, not cars and traffic."

One early offshoot was StreetsBlog, followed soon after by StreetFilms. These are two web sites every planner, local official, and community activist should be familiar with. Streetsblog now operates in New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles, and as Streetsblog New York editor Ben Fried told us at the PPS workshop, the number of blogs covering similar issues has dramatically expanded in the past few years. This has been fostered by the creation of the StreetsBlog network, a collection of nearly 400 independent web blogs that cover pedestrian and bike issues in communities big and small. 

Taking a look at the StreetsBlog network home page right now as I'm writing this, I see that reports are posted from Newton, Massachusetts (We Can Prevent Bicyclists From Being Run Over); Virginia Beach, Virginia (Virginia Beach to Lower Shore Drive Speed Limit), along with other cities. 

In fact, you may have noticed on our own web blog that we include the StreetsBlog network widget, where you can view recent stories posted by organizations that have joined the network. See what's happening right now -- just scroll towards the bottom of the right hand column on this page and you'll spot the widget.

But I don't want to forget that today is Friday, the day we've been posting short video clips we think you'll enjoy. StreetFilms offers over 300 great videos to choose from -- a collection that's constantly growing. For this post, I want to highlight a new video they've posted that ties in (at least to me) to what I wrote about Petrosino Square earlier this week. The video shows the creative way new public space (often called "parklets") is being created in San Francisco out of portions of streets. Turning pavement into parks -- perhaps something to think about for your community.

For more details about the Pavement to Parks program.

Breaking Our Addiction to Highway Level of Service Standards

Note from PCJ Editor Wayne Senville: this is the third in a series of postings about a recent two-day workshop I attended. Sponsored by the Project for Public Spaces, it focused on "streets as places."  

In this post I'm passing along some of what I learned from transportation engineer Gary Toth. Toth, who is now Senior Director of Transporation Initiatives for the Project for Public Spaces, worked for 34 years for the New Jersey Dept. of Transportation, where he served as Director of Project Planning & Development. He has been one of the leading national advocates for integrating land use and community considerations into transportation planning.

Why Getting Good Grades Isn't Always the Answer

It's a constant source of amazement to me how much we're addicted to report cards. Many of us strove in elementary school, high school, and then in college to get those A's (OK, sometimes a B or C was acceptable). But the idea of receiving an F for flunking/failure, or even a D, was something to dread.

I think -- and I'm not kidding about this -- this is part of what embues highway "Levels of Service" ratings with such power. Most local elected officials and citizens I've encountered seem to view good LOS grades as a sign of success, and D's (or even C's) as evidence of failure. Our built-in aversion to receiving a "failing" LOS report card is reinforced by the fact that there is some truth to the ratings: D does indicate congestion problems, while A or B means we can zip along our roadways with nary a stop.

You noticed that I highlighted the word "some." The problem, according to transportation engineer Gary Toth, is that LOS ratings tell you only part of the story -- and sometimes not the most important part. As Toth explains, "design decisions based on LOS performance measures end up serving only the through motorist at the expense of the very communities that the road is also supposed to serve."

How's that? According to Toth, LOS simply does not take into account other considerations -- such as impacts on pedestrians, on businesses served by the roadway, or on other community or neighborhood interests. It simply focuses on the motor vehicle. "The fact is," Toth said, "improving levels of service for cars can degrade it for pedestrians, shops, and others."

What's more, Toth adds, LOS calculations are typically made "using peak hour travel projections, generally 20 years into the future." This means our roads are intentionally "over designed" to handle capacity that only occurs at the very heaviest travel period. The problem with over-designed roadways, Toth notes, is that they can "take major bites out of the community's fabric," while -- especially during off peak hours -- turning the roadway into a speedway.

Are we bound by Level of Service standards contained in the Transportation Research Board's Highway Capacity Manual and AASHTO's Green Book? No, we're not, says Toth. As he points out, "while often used as a bible by traffic modelers, in reality the Highway Capacity Manual neither constitutes nor attempts to establish legal standards for highway construction." 

As Toth explains, "the Green Book and most DOTs provide guidelines for selection of LOS, but these are guidelines only ... selection of a target LOS is a policy decision and is based on a particular jurisdiction's philosophy on whether or not to accept congestion." Indeed, the Federal Highway Administration notes that "while the Highway Capacity Manual provides the analytical basis for design calculations and decisions, judgment must be used in the selection of the appropriate level of service for the facility under study."  

That was my key take away from Gary Toth's remarks: communities have a choice -- and these choices have major ramifications. They can decide on wider, straighter roadways to eliminate congestion (and receive better grades on their LOS report card), or they can balance traffic needs against other community goals, such as encouraging more pedestrian activity and street life. 

A community, if it wants to, can actually aim for having drivers slow down so they can smell the coffee -- and pull over to stop at that tempting coffee house. 

For a growing number of cities and towns, living with some congestion is a trade-off worth making.

It's also worth noting that major highway planning organizations such as AASHTO and the Institute for Transportation Engineers have been moving towards more flexible guidelines that take a roadway's surrounding context into account. [For more on this, see an excellent article we published by transportation planner Hannah Twaddell, "Fitting Roadways to Community Needs: A Look at the ITE Urban Thoroughfares Report."]

During the PPS workshop, Toth called level of service standards one of the "deadly duo" -- the other being traffic projections. More on the misuse of traffic projections in next Monday's post.

[Note: in putting together this post I drew on both my notes of Gary Toth's comments during the workshop and material in a handout he prepared, "Traffic projections and levels of service targets."]

Circling the Square

 From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

Twenty-five local officials, planners, and urban designers from across the U.S. and Canada (and even Brazil), in groups of six or seven, headed downstairs and out the front door of our meeting room in the SoHo section of lower Manhattan. 

Guided by staff from the Project for Public Spaces (PPS), we would be circling the square -- Petrosino Square, that is -- two blocks away.

With walking audit sheets in our hands, our job was to spend an hour carefully observing activities in the square and noting what we saw. Each group had a different sector to focus on. The goal of walking audits like this is to get a feel for what works and what doesn’t, and to come up with ideas for strengthening the place.

While Petrosino Square was the focal point, much of the audit hones in on how the public open space relates to traffic circulation patterns and to surrounding businesses and land uses.

Take a look at a portion of the audit sheet. Click on the image to view it at larger, readable size.

One important point PPS staff mentioned to our group as we headed out: the first five or six minutes of observing are especially important. That’s the time when we get our initial feel for the space we’re viewing.

I used the word “feel” deliberately, because we were advised during this initial period to simply absorb the sights, sounds, and even smells, of the area. This advice reminded me of what I had once heard about listening to music -- just to allow your first hearing of a piece of music to flow through you, without over analyzing it.

Also important to a walking audit (even to our somewhat condensed audit) is taking some time to ask questions of people using the public space or walking nearby, to gain insights from them.

My group was assigned to observe Spring Street, a narrow, but busy street that intersects the northern end of Petrosino Square [See number 5 in the map above]. We found Spring Street lined with retail stores, restaurants, and an assortment of other businesses.

Its' sidewalks hosted a hodge-podge of “street furnishings” such as trash cans and mail boxes, as well as a diverse assortment of signs plastered on light poles.

Also on this one short block: a subway entrance, some unexpected places to sit (as on a fire hydrant), and plenty of graffiti.

Plus a row of parked delivery trucks, two street vendors, and lots and lots of people coursing (yes, “coursing,” not “cursing”) their way down the block.

In a moment of inspiration (perhaps), I decided to ask several people if there was a park nearby where I could find a place to sit. I thought that might be too obvious a question, as Petrosino Square was just a block away, but of the six people I asked (including both street vendors) no one had any idea. One of the vendors was helpful, however, pulling out his street map and trying to locate a nearby park -- without any luck!

Petrosino Square itself has a long, triangular shape, with the narrow end being closest to Spring Street, where my group walked. During our early afternoon, weekday visit Petrosino Square was quite busy, with many of the bench spots taken.

Restaurants bordering the square along Lafayette and Kenmare Streets were also doing well.

Back upstairs in the meeting room we reconvened. Each group sat down to go over audit sheet notes and compare observations.

It was interesting, to see what things different people picked up on. Lots of pieces of information and details were shared. Most significantly, we spent time discussing how Petrosino Square seemed to work for those using the park, and for surrounding businesses.

 

We also try to view the square through the eyes of pedestrians (which we were for a short time). For example, several argued that it might make sense to close or narrow one of the streets bordering the square. This could allow for a much wider sidewalk, and also provide an attractive space for restaurants to place outdoor seating and better connect to the square.

During our discussions, most everyone also felt that Petrosino Square -- despite the work that has gone into improving it over the past few years (which included adding new pavement, benches, and trees) -- still lacked a strong sense of identity. Perhaps this explains, at least in part, why none of the six people I questioned while walking a block away had been aware of the park.

Petrosino Park, as it is now officially called (it used to be Kenmare Square), is named after a true New York City hero, Lieutenant Joseph Petrosino, the city’s first Italian-American sergeant of detectives -- of the Homicide Division.

Petrosino gained fame for warning the Secret Service in 1901 about an assassination plot to take the life of President William McKinley, a warning that unfortunately went unheeded. Ironically, Petrosino himself was assassinated in 1909 in Italy while on an undercover assignment investigating the background of organized crime leaders. Some 250,000 New Yorkers lined the streets of Manhattan for his funeral procession. For more about Lt. Petrosino.

PPS staff prodded us to think about how we might initiate changes to Petrosino Square, and what groups we might try to involve. For PPS, building constituencies to support more actively used public spaces is critically important. 

One big selling point -- especially to retail businesses bordering the public open space -- is how attracting more people will increase their business and, for owners, the value of their property. This is something I’ll come back to in the coming week in postings about Greeley Square and Bryant Park.

Moving cars quickly down the streets bordering the square doesn’t help much in generating business. In fact, it likely has the opposite effect. On the other hand, attracting more pedestrians and bicyclists to the square and its' surroundings would be a boon.

Words often repeated by PPS staff during the workshop -- and I jotted them down -- were “active,” “pedestrian-oriented,” “street life,” “sidewalks,” “outdoor eating,”  and “fun.” Don’t dismiss “fun” -- people like to be in a place they can enjoy being in. It sounds so obvious. Yet how can you enjoy being in a place where autos and trucks constantly stream by?

To Fred Kent, President of PPS, it’s also important to think outside the box, or in our case, outside the square. As he stressed, a small square like Petrosino can be much more than just a row of park benches with a couple of trees. It can be the heart of a neighborhood, the generator of activity, a place where people enjoy spending their time, socializing, eating, relaxing, and watching other people also enjoying themselves.

Petrosino Square’s already heading in that direction. It just needs a little more of a push. In the meantime, there’s much to enjoy in circling the square on a sunny afternoon.