Planning Commissioners Journal

Teardowns: Up With the New and Down With the Old?

The practice of bulldozing modest-size homes and replacing them with "McMansions" has alarmed many planners, neighborhood groups, and preservationists. How can communities respond? by Beth Humstone; from PCJ #83 (Summer 2011); 4 pages -- see other PCJ articles by Beth Humstone Read excerpts below; to order & download the full article use Shopping Cart button at bottom of this post. -- if you are a Planning Commissioners Journal subscriber (or receive the Journal through your planning commission/board), you can download the article at no charge.

Read first part of article [footnotes omitted]: "Up with the new and down with the old!" reads the ad by a Washington, DC realtor promoting teardowns to give the property owner the "best of both worlds -- a new home in an established neighborhood." But this practice of bulldozing older homes to replace them with updated -- and usually substantially larger -- ones is alarming to many planners, neighborhood groups, and preservationists. This so-called "mansionization" trend is dramatically changing the scale of traditional neighborhoods, threatening affordable housing, and altering historic properties -- most often in modest, post-war housing developments that once offered entry-level housing. Even with the cool-down in the housing market, communities in different parts of the country are wrestling with this issue. This is especially true for "first ring" suburbs that are attractive for their proximity to jobs (lower commuting costs) and lower prices (small lots and house in postwar subdivisions) and in scarce waterfront locations. But we can expect that more communities will again face the problem of teardowns once the housing market improves. What better time to plan than now while there's some breathing space? Why Tear Down? Teardowns are not new. In 2002 the National Trust for Historic Preservation cited teardowns as one of the most significant threats facing historic neighborhoods across the country. In 2008 the Trust documented teardowns in more than 500 communities in 40 states. Suburbs within easy commute to jobs and close to shops, services, and public transportation are increasingly popular. However, prospective buyers also want up-to-date homes with large, multistory spaces, multiple bathrooms, energy efficiency and two- or three-car attached garages. If local zoning allows for very large structures, the older ranches, split-levels, and capes found in many suburban neighborhoods will be ripe for teardowns. Teardowns vs. Infill Why are teardowns a problem? After all, infill development is often encouraged as an efficient way for communities to grow because it uses existing utilities and services, helps to prevent sprawl, reduces traffic, and revitalizes depressed neighborhoods. Yet, not every neighborhood is appropriate for new housing that is out-of-scale with the area's existing housing stock. Among the primary concerns with teardowns and mansionization are: -- The replacement by higher-priced homes of housing that is more affordable. -- Destruction of the scale and existing character of a neighborhood. -- Loss of historic resources, including Mid-Century Modern homes. -- Rise in property taxes throughout the neighborhood. -- Environmental impacts, including tree removal, reduction in green space, loss of sunlight, and increased stormwater runoff. -- Disposal of demolition debris. ... bulk of the article then focuses on ways of dealing with teardowns, including a range of planning and regulatory strategies.

order & download full article $4.00 (single copy license)
order & download full article $16.00 (license to print/store up to 20 copies of article)

Rebecca Cohen & Keith Wardrip talk about their article: "The Economic & Fiscal Benefits of Affordable Housing"

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville:

Our Summer issue features an article by Rebecca Cohen and Keith Wardrip, analysts at the Center for Housing Policy in Washington, D.C. Titled, “The Economic & Fiscal Benefits of Affordable Housing,” Cohen and Wardrip report on why affordable housing is not the economic bane that many think it is.

As we usually do before we publish articles in the PCJ, we make a draft available for review. We announce this both here on our PlannersWeb site and on our Linkedin group page.   

We received quite a few comments about Cohen and Wardrip’s article, some of which (given space limitations) are only briefly addressed in the article. I asked the authors if they’d take the time to respond to several of the comments that came in.

After you've their remarks, continue the discussion on our Linkedin group page (scroll down under the Discussions tab till you see the title of this post).

note: if you're a Planning Commissioners Journal subscriber, feel free to also download a complimentary pdf of Cohen & Wardrip's article from our Summer issue right now. Not a subscriber, their article can be downloaded for a small fee.

 

---

Dealing With the Fear of Affordable Housing

PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

In one of the comments that came in, one person noted that: “Over the years, in my experience, most problems have arisen not with the affordable housing tools available to jurisdictions, but with the public living in proximity to proposed developments, especially larger-scale ones.” The commenter then went on to highlight the value of holding public meetings near the location of a proposed development, adding that “one of the problems people have with affordable housing projects is that jurisdictions often do a very poor job of public relations with regard to the potential or perceived impacts on neighboring residents. So, it’s very important for the developer and community leaders to do all that they can do to get the local folks on board and calm whatever fears they may have.”

While I know that your article primarily focuses on the economic and fiscal impacts of affordable housing, I’d be curious if you have any thoughts about this comment? Are there ways of combating the fear of affordable housing that too often seems to be present?

Rebecca Cohen & Keith Wardrip:

We completely agree that developers and community leaders should communicate plans for affordable housing -- and, indeed, for any major development -- with neighbors and constituents, ideally starting outreach early in the development process to address concerns and get key stakeholders on board with the proposal.

Community meetings are good opportunities for leaders to educate the public on not only detailed plans for the specific project but also the need for more affordable housing. Neighbors may object to the high-density high-rise complexes that used to typify subsidized housing (who doesn’t?), but fears can be assuaged by explaining that today’s projects are much smaller-scale, well-managed, and designed to blend-in with the community.

We also think it’s important to remind concerned neighbors that many of the people in their community cannot afford market-rate housing. The Center for Housing Policy’s Paycheck to Paycheck suite of materials compares the cost of owning or renting a home in 210 metropolitan areas with the typical salary of a local employee in more than 70 occupations. Paycheck demonstrates the all-too-common disconnect between full-time employment and housing costs, for both owners and renters, for professions that don’t typically come to mind when we think of affordable housing, including school teachers, nurses, and social workers.

Finally, we think that community leaders can make the “equity” argument when discussing affordable housing with constituents. The Center has produced a wealth of resources highlighting the ways in which affordable housing can impact not only a local economy but health and educational outcomes, as well. Other researchers have demonstrated that children who have the opportunity to grow up in stable, high-quality housing, and attend schools with higher-income peers, tend to fare better over time.

Given the positive societal impacts of affordable housing and the inability of working families and older adults to make ends meet in many communities, providing assistance in the form of well-designed, well-maintained housing is the responsibility of an equitable society.

Design & Location Considerations

Wayne Senville:

Another commenter who reviewed your initial draft noted that “While the case for affordable housing may be positive overall, the potential downsides should be mentioned, if only to help communities avoid them.”

From the experience most planning commissioners have had, we know that pretty much any large development can have negatives impacts. In fact, one of the benefits planning commissioners often bring is helping developers find ways of improving their projects and mitigating negative impacts.

In your article you do mention that studies have found that well-designed projects tend to have positive impacts on the value of neighboring properties. From your experience at the Center for Housing Policy, are there any ways of helping ensure that the proposed affordable housing developments are, in fact, well-designed? And are there any other potential downsides for communities to take into account or avoid?

The Economic & Fiscal Benefits of Affordable Housing

A closer look at how well-designed affordable housing programs can generate economic and fiscal benefits to local communities. by Rebecca Cohen and Keith Wardrip; from PCJ #83 (Summer 2011); 4 pages -- you can also read Cohen and Wardrip's replies to several questions about their article. Read excerpts below; to order & download the full article use Shopping Cart button at bottom of this post. The download also includes a three-page "Worforce Housing Miscellany" prepared by the PCJ Staff, Jon Cecil, and Trisha Riggs (focusing on local efforts to provide workforce housing) -- if you are a Planning Commissioners Journal subscriber (or receive the Journal through your planning commission/board), you can download the Cohen & Wardrip article plus the Workforce Housing Miscellany at no charge.

Read start of article:   When communities take a moment to consider their most important assets, the candidates that are often mentioned include high-quality schools, access to parks and open space, a strong job base, a vibrant arts scene, and even a winning sports franchise. How often have you heard an ample supply of affordable housing mentioned as an asset? Instead, conversations about affordable housing usually focus on the cost to taxpayers and rarely take into account the fiscal and economic benefits that accrue when communities encourage the development of affordable homes. As cities and counties across the country try to bring their revenues and expenditures in-line and prioritize how to spend scarce resources, policymakers and planners should understand the benefits of well-designed affordable housing programs. Such programs are important now more than ever, as research demonstrates that housing affordability has worsened significantly in recent years. While the provision of affordable housing involves important social and civic values, our focus in this article is aimed at "clearing the air" about affordable housing's economic and fiscal impacts and highlighting some local strategies for addressing the challenge of providing housing for all. Sidebar, Affordable Housing versus Workforce Housing. Part I: The Economic & Fiscal Benefits of Affordable Housing 1. One-Time and Ongoing Job Creation and Spending: It stands to reason that building or rehabilitating affordable housing creates jobs in the construction field. Research by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) estimates that building 100 affordable housing units for families through the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program can lead to the creation of more than 120 jobs, on average, during a project's construction phase. Even more importantly, long after the homes are occupied, the ripple effect from residents of these new units can support as many as 30 new jobs in a wide array of industries, including retail, healthcare, and local government. These employment effects are on-par with building comparable market-rate units. 2. Positive Fiscal Impacts for State and Local Governments: When affordable homes are built or rehabbed, the funds flowing to cities and states can be considerable. Revenues can take the form of fees for permitting, zoning, and utilities, or they can reflect sales, income, or property taxes generated by construction-related economic activity. The NAHB estimates that 100 units of affordable housing for families generates the same amount of one-time revenue for jurisdictions as does a comparable market-rate property -- roughly $827,000, on average -- with more than half coming from permit/impact fees and utility user fees. Additionally, research findings summarized in a report by the Center for Housing Policy (CHP) show that the impact of a new affordable housing development on nearby property values is more likely to be neutral or positive than negative. As the CHP report notes, the quality of the properties' design, management, and maintenance are important factors. Moreover, when affordable housing replaces a vacant lot or a dilapidated building, local governments will benefit from increased property tax revenues. Sidebar, Impact of Affordable Housing on Nearby Property Values. One persistent concern raised about affordable housing development is that it will flood local schools with children, increasing the demand for school facilities and educational services. Putting aside the need for our society to provide a solid education to all children, do lower-income households actually have significantly more children than upper-income ones? The answer is no. Today there is only a small difference in the average number of children per household when comparing income levels. The much more important trend, and one that carries across all income levels, is the dramatic reduction in the average number of children per household. ... article continues with sections on: 3. Reducing Foreclosure Risks and Associated Costs 4. Improving Worker and Employer Attraction and Retention 5. Increasing the Buying Power of Residents and Part II: Low- or No-Cost Strategies for Increasing the Availability of Affordable Homes 1. Expand Development Opportunities 2. Reduce Red Tape 3. Capitalize on Market Activity 4. Generate Capital 5. Preserve and Recycle Resources

order & download full article, plus the Workforce Housing Miscellany (7 pages total) $5.50 (single copy license)
order & download full article, plus the Workforce Housing Miscellany (7 pages total) $25.00 (license to print/store up to 20 copies of article)

The Tee-Ball Approach to Development

Planning for the impacts of new development can make a difference to your municipality’s fiscal well-being. by Jim Segedy, FAICP, and Lisa Hollingsworth-Segedy, AICP; from PCJ #81 (Winter 2011); 2 pages Read excerpts below; to order & download the full article use Shopping Cart button at bottom of this post. See other articles by the Segedys.

If you've been a parent, a grandparent, an aunt, or an uncle, no doubt you've been to a tee-ball game. The youngsters on each team can hardly sit still in the dugout, and the bleachers are full of family members eager to cheer on their budding sports heroes. A pint-size batter steps up to the tee, winds up for the swing, and clips the ball, which rolls four or five feet towards the pitcher. The crowd goes wild, cheering as the batter runs as fast as little legs will go ... towards third base! That's how it sometimes goes with our local communities' attempts at development. The community gets so excited about a proposed development that it can head off in the wrong direction -- without having the infrastructure needed to support the development. Some examples: A subdivision is approved in an area with lots too small for replacement septic drain fields and/or where the population density is too low to be feasibly served by public sewer. An office park is platted in an area where water lines are too small to provide adequate fire protection. A large retail/dining/lodging facility is proposed for an area where road capacity is already maxed out and there's no land available for additional parking. In other words, communities are commonly enticed by development for which the infrastructure is inadequate. This not only burdens the community, it also minimizes the long-term return on private investment. It's just like a tee-ball player running the wrong direction. Before we offer solutions on how to avoid unsustainable development, it makes sense to examine WHY this happens so frequently in communities. In many cases, it comes down to looking at only part of the equation: short-term gains -- without considering long-term, life-cycle costs. If you find that recent developments have placed a burden on your water, sewer, roads, public safety, schools, and so on, this points to the need for some improvements to your community's planning and development strategies to ensure that the costs of community services are factored into your development review process. ... article continues The full article can be ordered & downloaded. Click lightning bolt icon at top left.

order & download full article $3.25 (single copy license)
order & download full article $12.00 (license to print/store up to 20 copies of article)

Building Invisible Walls: Growth Center Strategies

How urban growth boundaries work, and why a growing number of metropolitan areas are using them. by Beth Humstone; from PCJ #81 (Winter 2011); 3 pages -- read our interview with Beth about this article Read first section of article below; to order & download the full article use Shopping Cart button at bottom of this post. For information on other articles by Beth Humstone published in the Planning Comm'rs Journal

Just as walls once created clear distinctions between town and countryside, today's urban containment strategies aim to keep urban places urban and rural places rural. Urban containment -- the constraint of growth to limited geographic areas -- is of great interest to planners for its potential benefits of preserving open space, saving money on public services, reinvesting in cities, and providing a more predictable permitting process. In fact, the American Planning Association estimates that over 100 metropolitan areas now have some form of urban containment strategy. Of the three principal kinds of urban containment strategies -- urban service areas, greenbelts, and urban growth boundaries -- in this article, we'll be focusing on urban growth boundaries. What is An Urban Growth Boundary? An urban growth boundary encompasses an area defined on a map where: development is permitted at a higher density or intensity than surrounding areas, mixed uses are typically encouraged, and a full complement of public services is provided. The size of the area within the boundary typically is configured to provide sufficient land to meet population and land use needs for a 20-year period. Over time, the boundaries may be adjusted -- either by expansion or contraction -- to meet changing conditions. In the United States, urban growth boundaries have been established through local initiatives, regional strategies, and state mandates and/or incentives. Why Plan for Urban Growth Boundaries? Communities and regions plan for urban growth boundaries in order to meet the goals of their comprehensive plans, because they are mandated or encouraged to do so by state government, or because they have a particular need such as revitalization of a downtown or protection of important farmland. Within a comprehensive plan, places are delineated both where growth will be encouraged and development limited. The plan typically contains projections for population, employment, and housing so the community knows how much land is needed for different uses. The plan also identifies existing development, the location and capacity of services, and important environmental and natural resource features. By designating a growth boundary, a community or region can provide for infill and contiguous growth that reinforces and reinvests in existing settled areas, limits urban services to avoid costly extensions to rural areas, and protects environmental or natural resources outside the center. A few examples: Lexington, Kentucky uses an urban growth boundary to meet its planning goals. The Lexington urban growth boundary, which includes Fayette County, was first adopted in 1958 -- the oldest growth boundary in the United States. Its primary purpose was to protect the bluegrass and horse farms for which the region is famous by requiring most development to take place within the boundary and severely limiting development outside the boundary. Over the years, the boundary has been adjusted, and planning and zoning for the area has been altered to meet changing needs and political pressures. The urban growth area was initially 67 square miles (comprising 22 percent of the county's total land area); it is now 75 square miles (30 percent). In New Jersey, the State (in conjunction with the National Park Service) established the Pinelands National Reserve in 1979. Within the 1.1 million acre Reserve, a comprehensive management plan guides the management and protection of environmentally sensitive and agricultural lands threatened by sprawling land development. A joint county-state-federal Pinelands Commission reviews local ordinances for consistency with the management plan. The plan also delineates regional growth boundaries. The Commission uses a transfer of development rights (TDR) program to protect important open space and natural areas, as well as encourage more development in Pinelands' town and village centers. To date, over 58,000 acres have been protected and nearly 4,500 development rights have been transferred to projects proposed within "Regional Growth Areas." ... article continues with discussion of six key planning issues that need to be addressed when considering urban growth boundaries.

order & download full article $3.75 (single copy license)
order & download full article $15.00 (license to print/store up to 20 copies of article)

Interview with Beth Humstone about her article "Building Invisible Walls: Urban Growth Boundaries"

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

In our Winter issue you'll find an interesting article about a much discussed approach to managing growth: the use of urban growth boundaries (or "UGBs" as they're often called). PCJ contributing writer Beth Humstone, who has long experience as a planner -- and also served for several years as Director of what's now Smart Growth Vermont -- explains the basics of "UGBs" in her latest article.

I asked Beth to take a few minutes to respond to some questions I had about some of the points she makes in her article:

Wayne Senville:

One of the concerns I've heard about growth boundaries is that they increase housing costs within areas inside the boundary because the supply of developable land is constrained. Is this true? -- and what ways are there to prevent this from happening, or to minimize the impacts?

Beth Humstone:

Housing prices need not rise with urban growth boundaries, particularly where there has been adequate planning for growth. While land values may increase by constraining the supply of land available for development, higher densities may keep housing prices stable or even lower them. That's what Arthur C. Nelson and Casey J. Dawkins found in their 2004 report for the American Planning Association (Urban Containment in the United States, Planning Advisory Service Report 520).

To avoid raising housing prices, it is very important that the area within the growth boundary is sufficient to meet population growth for a reasonable time period, usually 20 years. The amount of land needed will be determined primarily by zoning densities and the supply of undeveloped or underdeveloped land that is appropriate for housing. In addition, some factor should be applied that takes into account that not all land needed for development will be available for this purpose within the twenty year time frame.

Because market demand and the availability of land for development are difficult to precisely project, it is important to monitor growth rates, housing and land prices, and densities of development within the growth boundaries over time. If prices rise to unacceptable levels, there are several options: increase the boundary to increase the land supply; increase densities and/or institute minimum densities; or adopt inclusionary zoning.

Wayne Senville:

In your article you point to municipal public service cost savings from having urban growth boundaries. Can you explain why that's the case?

The Place Making Dividend

Why fostering a sense of place is key to having a strong, economically vibrant city or town. by Edward McMahon; from PCJ #80 (Fall 2010) We're making available the full text of the article below; you can also download a complimentary pdf of the article. For information on other articles by McMahon published in the Planning Commissioners Journal.

In June, the technology giant Apple finally opened its first store in the Georgetown neighborhood of Washington, D.C. The grand opening is the culmination of a saga stretching back two and one half years to when Apple bought a building that formerly housed a women's clothing store. It took Apple eight months to build its new store, but it took them more than twice as long to get design approval (19 months) for the new building which replaced the former clothing store. The protracted design review process began when Apple proposed their standard (off-the shelf), modern façade (they are, after all, a high-tech company) that they use in suburban stores all over the country. The Georgetown Design Review Board balked at this and reaped a heap of criticism for letting historic preservation stand in the way of retail progress. The new building, which is now complete, looks pretty much like dozens of other historic commercial structures that line Georgetown main commercial thoroughfares. Some may think the façade is bland. Others will say it fits right in. Whatever you think, one of the things the new design proves is that when a chain store developer comes to town it generally has at least three designs (A, B, or C) ranging from Anywhere USA to Unique (i.e., sensitive to local character). According to retail consultant, Bob Gibbs, "which one gets built depends heavily upon how much push back the company gets from local residents and officials about design and its importance."

U is for Urban Sprawl

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 | Zoning

order & download the complete Planning ABC's

---

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

Stepping Up to the Plate in West Palm Beach

We've been periodically posting excerpts from "State of the City" addresses given by mayors from across the U.S. These addresses can offer insights into both innovative programs and challenges facing cities.

Previously posted:

Shoreview, Minnesota, Mayor Sandy Martin Salt Lake City, Utah, Mayor Ralph Becker Ashland, Oregon, Mayor John Stromberg Topeka, Kansas, Mayor Bill Bunten Albany, New York, Mayor Gerald Jennings Grand Rapids, Michigan, Mayor George K. Hartwell

Austin, Texas, Mayor Lee Leffingwell Fort Worth, Texas, Mayor Mike Moncrief Riverside, California, Mayor Ronald O. Loveridge Minneapolis, Minnesota, Mayor R.T. Rybak Boston, Massachusetts, Mayor Thomas M. Menino Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, Mayor Mick Cornett

---

West Palm Beach, Florida, Mayor Lois J. Frankel
State of the City Address (Jan. 13, 2010) -- read complete text; excerpts below

Without question, this past year has been a rough one for millions of people around the world including right here in Palm Beach County.

Unemployment, foreclosures, businesses struggling for customers and capital.

The news is sobering but I believe there are many ways that we are able to affect our own destiny without getting swept away by bad loans and pessimism.

In the words of a famous French poet, “To accomplish great things, we must not only act, but also dream; not only plan, but also believe" [Anatole France]. In my report to you today I come with optimism for our city because City leaders and stakeholders, including many of you here, are taking bold actions to make West Palm Beach the great livable city we know it can be.

A city for people of all ages, races, ethnicities and sexual orientations.

Using public and private dollars we are laying the ground work to attract and retain residents, business, and visitors. And that means more jobs and prosperity.

A livable city requires good access to health care.

[see complete text to read sections of the State of the City address focusing on local economic development; redevelopment of the old Palm Beach Mall; growth of the three area hospitals; capital projects; dealing with crime; environmental issues and energy conservation; revival of the old downtown/Clematis Street corridor; and opening of the new public library]

Today I want tell you about our newest, most important revitalization project that is close to my heart and that of my fellow Commissioners. Coleman Park is located less than 2 miles from downtown just north of Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard. Built in the 1920’s, it is the historic center of West Palm Beach’s African-American community and in the past has been home for many Black business, political, educational and other leaders.

In the 1960’s as desegregation took hold, middle class residents moved out of this neighborhood, and a once vibrant area declined into an environment riddled with drug dealing, violence, and deteriorating properties. Today more than half of Coleman Park residents live below the poverty level, less than a quarter of the homes are homesteaded, and dozens of vacant lots sit dormant.

Make no mistake: chronic poverty is a blight, not just on one neighborhood but on an entire community. It affects our safety, our schools and our workforce.

No longer is it acceptable that the people who live in Coleman Park, many of whom are children, elderly, and people who work as nurse’s aides and hotel maids, remain in the dark shadow of our great city.

For more than one year we have been quietly planning and receiving input from more than 150 participants at community meetings.

At first Coleman Park residents were skeptical. But with the leadership of Commissioner Ike Robinson and people like native-born James Irving and neighborhood president Kathy Gardner there is now a belief that things can change for the better and Coleman Park residents are becoming engaged with this effort.

Last September our City Commission adopted the Coleman Park Improvement Plan. One of the keys to this plan is the creation of more home ownership because it brings safety, vibrancy and stability to the neighborhood. With a multi-million dollar allotment of federal dollars we are buying vacant and foreclosed properties and selling new and rehabbed homes at half price to income eligible police, teachers and working families who intend to make their Coleman Park home their primary residence.

Through a partnership with Workforce Alliance, the School Board and local trade organizations, area residents will have an opportunity to learn construction skills and participate in building these homes.

We have five other programs aimed at improving the hundreds of deteriorating housing units that are the fabric of the neighborhood. Trees will be planted and bumpy roads resurfaced. The Housing Authority’s Dunbar Village will be demolished and eventually replaced with new housing and a new road grid. And listen to this: with a grant from the Quantum Foundation, the entire neighborhood now has free wi-fi access to the internet. On the screen you see students at Roosevelt Middle School rehabbing old computers that are given to low income families that participate in digital literacy classes.

As you see, our efforts are extending beyond capital improvements. Multiple strategies are being implemented including nutrition, health, early learning for our youngest children, tutoring for our teens, economic development and more.

And the rebirth of Coleman Park is much more than a City government effort. Let me tell you one very inspiring story.

Pat Dixon is a much loved community figure, surviving paycheck to paycheck.

Last year she was living in cramped quarters rearing her three grandchildren whose mother recently passed away. Her Coleman Park neighbors Chris and Colleen Tress decided to do something extraordinary. ... With the help of generous strangers, the Tresses bought this dilapidated house. Room by room, volunteers, including our own fire fighters, transformed the home into it into a cozy haven for Pat and her grandchildren. On January first Pat was welcomed by the neighborhood to her new home. Her reaction says it all. Woman -- we're the best!!!

And as you can see on the big screens, there are many other wonderful private, public and non-profit partners who believe in our mission.

The Continental Group manager of 13 downtown condominiums will donate one full day of labor per employee, approximately 1,200 hours to paint old homes.

Chris Kennedy of Suffolk construction and his sister Susan Lemieux of the Weiss School will construct a new home for use by the Lords Place.

In lieu of the table center pieces this morning Gunster is donating the funds for the neighborhoods’ gateway signs.

 Also stepping up to the plate, the greatest home-run hitter of all time, with no asterisks, my neighbor -- Hank Aaron and his wife, Billye. Recently we took the Aarons on a tour of Coleman Park. They were inspired by the people and the project. The Aarons have graciously committed to be a part of this historic transition. Ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming Billye and Hank Aaron. It is an honor to have you here today and to have you join us in this very important mission.

Now I am asking each and every one of you to add your name to the list and be part of an amazing dream come true. There are so many ways to help.

Donate a computer, become a mentor, help fix up a property. Or participate in a Workforce Alliance job program that will pay you to employ an eligible worker.

There is information on your table and a card you may leave behind to indicate your interest.

... I hope that you agree that West Palm Beach is on track to becoming the livable city we want and deserve. ... Together we are laying the groundwork for a vibrant and prosperous future.

---

For more on Coleman Park, see:

• "West Palm's history-rich Coleman Park neighborhood seeks revival" in The Palm Beach Post (Jan. 12, 2010).
• Coleman Park Neighborhood Revitalization (City of West Palm Beach web page).

In Our Spring Issue: "No Certification, No Money"

Recent legal developments have put a spotlight on exclusionary zoning practices. On the revival of Civil Rights obligations in HUD funding programs, and the role of the local "analysis of impediments." by Michael Allen, Esq.; from PCJ #78 (Spring 2010); 2 pages Read an excerpt from the article below; to order & download the full article use Shopping Cart button at bottom of this post.

Read first part of article: Since the late 1960s, states and municipalities receiving federal housing and community development funds -- under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnership (HOME), and similar programs -- have been required to certify that they will comply with federal civil right laws. Many have done so without understanding what is required by these certifications, assuming that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) would not challenge their validity. Until recently, this assumption was largely correct, as HUD rarely questioned recipients on these issues and virtually never terminated or threatened to terminate funding. HUD simply did not press recipients to comply with their civil rights fair housing certifications. Consequently, from 1995 through 2009, hundreds of recipients bowed to NIMBY pressures, ignored their certifications, and spent billions of dollars in federal funds to segregate affordable housing by placing most of it in already disadvantaged neighborhoods or communities. In just the past year, however, this situation has begun to rapidly change -- the result of a ground-breaking lawsuit against Westchester County, New York ) and the Obama Administration's interest in reviving civil rights enforcement. Under emerging HUD guidelines and a stepped-up agency enforcement policy, recipients of federal housing funds will be required to take a hard look at impediments to fair housing choice in their jurisdictions and propose robust actions to overcome them. This new environment will have a dramatic impact on communities across the country, whether they are one of the 1200+ "entitlement jurisdictions" receiving federal funds directly from HUD, or small cities or rural counties whose federal funds are channeled through a state community development agency. Civil Rights Certifications in Federal Housing and Community Development Programs To be eligible for CDBG and related funds, state and local governments must certify that they will comply with a range of federal civil rights laws and "affirmatively further fair housing." Since at least 1995, this last obligation, sometimes referred to as "AFFH," has required recipients to conduct an Analysis of Impediments (AI), in which they identify and analyze impediments to fair housing choice within their jurisdictions, and outline appropriate actions to overcome those impediments. HUD also requires recipients to maintain records supporting the analysis and the actions taken to overcome impediments. HUD requires state and local governments to use their AIs to list impediments experienced by members of all seven protected classes, whether caused by intentional discrimination or by policies and practices that have a harsher effect on members of a protected class than on those not in a protected class. Recipients, in their AI, must make an honest assessment of their own zoning, land use, building, and other ordinances that may decrease housing choice, and must design approaches that will counteract those negative effects. An AI is also required to look at impediments caused by private sector actors, including steering in the sales and rental markets, discriminatory lending practices, insurance redlining, and similar practices. While recipients are encouraged to provide affordable housing, HUD makes clear that doing so does not fully satisfy the obligation to affirmatively further fair housing, where the focus is on eliminating discrimination on the basis of protected class and expanding housing opportunity regardless of income. ...the article then continues with a discussion of the Westchester County litigation and its broader national implications.

order & download full article $3.25 (single copy license)
order & download full article $10.00 (license to print/store up to 20 copies of article)

In Our Spring Issue: "Perspectives on Housing"

Today’s demographic and economic conditions, along with consumer preferences, are creating a major shift in housing demand. The time is ripe to for communities to develop housing strategies that address these changes. articles by Beth Humstone, Wendy Grey, and Edward McMahon; from PCJ #78 (Spring 2010); 4 pages -- see our conversations with Beth Humstone and with Wendy Grey, two of our new contributing writers. Read excerpts below; to order & download the full articles use Shopping Cart button at bottom of this post.

First part of article by Beth Humstone: Future Housing Demand -- Problem or Opportunity How many times has your commission heard, "But there's no market for that development," "People want a big home on one acre," or "It's more affordable to buy a house out in the country?" In the past it was commonly accepted that suburban or fringe housing on large lots was where most of the housing market was focused. But the recent housing foreclosure crisis, coupled with high unemployment and rising energy costs, has challenged old assumptions and dramatically altered the picture. Now planners in communities across the country are increasingly hearing different demands for: more housing close to transit; walkable neighborhoods; and affordable, low-maintenance, energy-efficient homes. In this chaotic time, how do citizen and professional planners determine what people really want or need, and what to plan for? It is essential that planners understand the market for housing in their community: what types (and price ranges) are needed, and in what locations. Planners must also consider economic trends and other factors that could impact future demand. Today's demographic and economic conditions, along with consumer preferences, are converging to create a major shift in housing demand. The time is ripe to plan for future needs. Economic forecasts suggest that there will not be much action on homebuilding for about two years. Many communities currently have excess housing stock that very likely will be filled before much new construction begins. So there is time to examine residential markets and how they are changing to avoid housing shortages, meet community needs and revitalize neighborhoods stricken by economic conditions. Demographic Trends Two national trends are clear: (1) decreasing household size, and (2) an aging population. Once planners focused their housing plans on providing for couples with children. Now these households are a minority. As Arthur C. Nelson, Director of the Metropolitan Research Center at the University of Utah, recently noted that: "Between 1950 and 2000, average household size decreased from 3.38 to 2.59 [and] will continue to fall to about 2.46 persons by 2030 ... Single-person households will rival households with children and will be the fastest-growing market segment." Moreover, as Nelson explains, "Baby boomers will turn 65 between 2011 and 2029. Large homes in outlying locations may no longer be affordable or practical for retired people. According to a report published by the Urban Land Institute, "Some baby boomers will choose to downsize to an apartment or condominium after their children leave the 'nest'... Multifamily housing allows seniors to remain in their neighborhoods through the different stages of their lives without the hassle of maintaining single-family housing." ... article continues with look at Economic Conditions and Consumer Preferences First part of article by Wendy Grey, AICP: Perspectives on Housing Historically, the purchase of a house has been the single largest investment most families make. People select a new house based on criteria such as affordability, whether it is in a good school district, and whether they feel comfortable with the neighbors and neighborhood. In recent years another factor was also added to the mix: the assumption that, almost regardless of the choice they made, the house purchased would increase in value. With the end of the housing bubble, this is no longer the case. It is important to remember that there are also broad demographic patterns that influence the demand for housing, the most significant being migration, immigration, and age. Migration. We have historically been a mobile society. We move to pursue better opportunities. The huge migration to the Sunbelt over the past 25 years is a recent example of this pattern. Immigration. Much of our population growth is coming from immigration. Between 2000 and 2007, the immigrant population grew by 22 percent, to 38 million . While the majority of immigrants have historically lived in once mostly lived in central cities, many immigrants now live in suburbs and rural areas. Age. The most significant age group in terms of numbers is the Baby Boomer generation -- born between 1946 and 1964. Having been the driving force behind the expansion of suburban living, Boomers were expected to sell their homes and relocate to popular retirements areas. Gen Xers, born between 1965 and 1980, are now the prime market for family oriented homes. However, Gen Xers have had to deal with a higher cost of living over the past decade, and have often found themselves priced out of the housing market as they've tried to move up the property ladder -- especially as more Boomers have stayed put. The crash in the housing market and the recession have affected the anticipated trends in migration and immigration and people's housing options in the short term. With unemployment and foreclosures up and mortgage lending restricted, people are not relocating, and the buying and selling of houses is down. Immigration has also slowed. One key role for planners and planning commissioners is to consider strategies that will help recreate viable neighborhoods for current and future residents. This will involve reconsidering land use patterns, particularly in suburban areas, where the recovery in the housing market is expected to lag. ... article continues First part of article by Edward McMahon: Perspectives on Housing Back in July, Builder Magazine published an article titled "Brave New World: After the Bust, Builders Might Be Surprised at What Future Shoppers Will Want," by John Caufield, Jenny Sullivan, and Nigel Maynard. To gather data for this piece, the magazine commissioned American Lives, a California-based market research firm run by pollster Brooke Warrick, to conduct a nationwide study of prospective homebuyers' attitudes toward the economy, home styles, product preferences, energy efficiency, and green features. It also examined changing attitudes in regard to the role of the home and the imp act of demographic changes on buyer preferences. The results are surprising and they suggest that the types of new homes that were most prevalent before the recession will not satisfy the needs of tomorrow's buyers. One reason for shifting buyer preferences is the fact that there are so many different buyer profiles. Tomorrow's market is made for the foreseeable future. So what do buyers want? Given that housing prices are down 30 percent from their peak -- and even more in some markets -- big, flashy houses are no longer priorities. Buyers are less likely to think of housing primarily as an investment and more likely to think about how the house will fit their lifestyle. What is more, for many buyers the character of the neighborhood is more important than the size of the house. In fact, more than 50 percent of respondents in the survey said they were willing to accept a smaller house "in the neighborhood I want." This does not mean product is irrelevant, but it does mean that for many buyers the location of the home -- the place -- is now more important than the house itself -- the product. According to Builder, one subset of buyers that homebuilders should learn more about is women. Women have always played a big role in homebuying decisions, but demographic data show that by 2010 households headed by a woman will number well over 30 million. ... article continues The three full articles can be ordered & downloaded. Click lightning bolt icon at top left of this page.

order & download full articles $3.75 (single copy license)
order & download full articles $10.00 (license to print/store up to 20 copies of articles)

American Makeover's SPRAWLANTA

You may recall that in March we reported on American Makeover, a film project contrasting sprawl to new urbanism. As the producers said "Our project is to visit six cities across America to create six short 'webisodes' about new urbanism. Each episode will profile an actual town or neighborhood, giving viewers a first-hand look at new urbanism and what its like to live there."

I need to note that the Planning Commissioners Journal is a backer of the American Makeover project. Having said that, I think the first episode -- SPRAWLANTA -- is very effective. But judge for yourself:

The first half of the video uses experts to set the context, calling the Atlanta metro area "the poster child of suburban sprawl," "the fastest growing settlement in the history of the planet," "the most toxic city in the country," where the average worker "drives 66 miles a day," and where in 2008 "over 60 pedestrians were killed and over 1,000 injured." 

Interestingly, the issue most strongly hammered home is the adverse health impacts from sprawl. This should resonate with many viewers.

The second half of the video then looks at one new urbanist project, Glenwood Park. Through this example, key new urbanist principles are described: walkability; mixed uses; garages in the back; and so on. 

The wrap up explains how compact, traditional development can address the problems cited at the start of the video. Again, the primary focus is on health.

To me, American Makeover is advocacy video at its best. Yes, the video has a point of view. No, it doesn't delve into the complexities and shadings of various issues. That's simply not possible in nine minutes. 

The aim of the video is to grab the attention and reach those Americans who may have a vague sense that something is wrong with the way many of our cities have developed. That's the target audience, not planners or urban designers who are already convinced that sprawling development is a problem and new urbanism one important solution. But it's up to planners, architects, and others to support efforts like this that will get the message out to the broader public.

Take a minute now to learn more about American Makeover and how you can support the project.

Special May Discount on Our "Housing: Opening the Door" Publication

"As a local planning commissioner, you can help your community harmonize the housing and service needs of your whole community with the specific objections of neighborhood opponents." -- Michael Allen, Esq., from "Why Not in Our Back Yard?"
Many communities are struggling to provide the kinds of housing their residents need and can afford. From multi-family housing, to community land trusts, to understanding the changing nature of the housing "consumer," this set of articles from the Planning Comm'rs Journal will help you to better understand -- and deal with -- the design and zoning issues facing these communities. Also included are thoughtful observations on NIMBY's, a look at both homeowner and neighborhood associations, and some innovative suggestions for today's housing market. You'll find this collection of articles useful to both new and seasoned members of planning commissions.
Special Pricing for this May only: order all of the following articles for delivery by first-class mail, as a bound 67-page reprint collection for just $20, including Free Shipping (a savings of $8.50). Plus, as a special bonus, after we receive your order we'll email you a pdf of four more articles on housing included in our just published Spring issue (see "Perspectives on Housing" and "No Certification, No Money").	-- individual articles can be ordered & downloaded, just click on the article titles below -- note: if you want all the articles, please order the full reprint collection for delivery by mail & use the Shopping Cart button on the left.
Given this special pricing, no additional discounts are available on this reprint collection.

Where Does Housing Go?
Single-Family-Only-Zones by Laurence Gerckens, FAICP	A look back at the origins of single-family-only zoning, and why its key premise of fostering good citizenship through home ownership is unsound.
Zoning & Changing Lifestyles by Greg Dale & Michael Chandler	An overview of zoning focusing on the impact that changes in our society are having on local zoning regulation.
Does Smart Growth = Equitable Growth? by Leah Kalinosky	Smart growth promises less sprawl, reduced congestion, cleaner air, fewer wasted tax dollars, and revitalized neighborhoods. Yet advocates for low-income communities fear it may also lead to rising housing prices, displacing lower-income families and small businesses.
A Mix of Housing by David Brussat	Some insights on our mix of housing, by Providence, Rhode Island architecture and urban planning columnist David Brussat.
Bright Idea: Family Housing Downtown by Wayne Senville	The City of Vancouver has taken creative steps to encourage families to live in the downtown core. From the PCJ's special Bright Ideas series.
Housing for All:
"I" is for Inclusionary by Laurence Gerckens, FAICP	Planning historian Laurence Gerckens provides a brief historical overview of efforts to promote inclusionary housing. From Gerckens' Planning ABCs publication.
Providing Affordable Housing by Michael Bodaken & Anne Heitlinger	An overview of ways in which state and local officials can spur the development of affordable housing.
Understanding HUD's "Consolidated Plan" Requirement by Ed Gramlich	Instead of viewing the Consolidated Plan as a bureaucratic obstacle, planners can use it as a tool to better address the needs of low income residents.
Community Land Trusts: An Introduction by Tom Peterson	Community land trusts are offering an increasing number of communities a way of developing long-term affordable housing.
Designing Multi-Family Housing for Residential Neighborhoods by Rene Davids & Christine Killory	Two award-winning architects discuss how they've approached integrating multi-family housing into residential neighborhoods.
Bright Idea: Workforce Housing by Wayne Senville	How one Minnesota city has taken steps to provide housing that wage-earners can afford. From the PCJ's special Bright Ideas series.
The New "Active Adult" Housing by Wayne Lemmon	A common sense alternative for single-family home ownership providing maintenance free living close to family and friends is part of the "pitch" for active over-55 communities, a rapidly growing segment of the housing market.
Visitability: A Major "No-Step" Towards Inclusive Housing by Jordana L. Maisel	With the aging of the baby boomer generation, homes that allow seniors to age in place will become increasingly desirable. Changes in public policy and design practices must begin to prepare for the growing number of seniors who want to age in their own homes.
Bright Idea: Aging in Place by Wayne Senville	A brief look at the growing interest in making it easier for seniors to "age in place." From the PCJ's special Bright Ideas series.
The Changing Face of Manufactured Housing by Matt Weiser	There has been an evolution in manufactured housing: from mobile homes to homes that are hard to distinguish from traditional, site-built designs. A growing number of communities recognize that it can offer an affordable housing option compatible with existing neighborhoods.
Homeowners Associations by Alan Weinstein	a look at some of the benefits and disadvantages of homeowners associations, and how their rules are shaping the lives of a growing number of people.
Public Participation:
On NIMBYs: A Nose for Nimbys, by Christine Robbins Is Your Community Being Invaded by NIMBYs?, by Elaine Cogan Why Not in Our Back Yard?, by Michael Allen The "Multi-Family Housing Blues", by Bob Mulder Dealing With the Fear of Multi-Family Housing, by Ray Quay	Five articles from the Planning Commissioners Journal that will help you better address NIMBY issues in your community.
Dealing with an Angry Public by Debra Stein	A frequently faced, but seldom discussed, subject is how to deal with angry citizens at public meetings. Community relations consultant Debra Stein suggests ways of keeping cool when things get hot.
	Take a look also at our other Taking a Closer Look reprint sets

Florida Planner Wendy Grey Joins the PCJ as a Contributing Writer

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

I want to introduce you to another experienced planner who is joining the Planning Commissioners Journal as a contributor writing. Wendy Grey is a long-time Florida planner. Since 2002 she's run her own planning consulting practice, Wendy Grey Land Use Planning LLC. Wendy previously served for ten years as Planning Director for the City of Tallahassee and Leon County, and before that worked as a planner for the Florida Department of Community Affairs. She's also written a regular column for the Florida League of Cities on planning and growth management issues.

Wayne: Can you tell us a little about the issues you faced as Planning Director for Tallahassee? Was the area experiencing rapid growth?

Wendy: Tallahassee didn't experience the boom other parts of the State did. As a state capital and college town, we experienced slower, but very steady growth. Two challenging issues we dealt with were the increasing economic segregation of the community and meeting our transportation needs in a way that was reflective of our community values.

Our analysis of economic segregation led to the adoption of the "Southern Strategy" whereby both the City and County committed to projects and policies intended to improve the quality of life on the south side of town, which had a high percentage of low income residents. The City also passed an inclusionary housing ordinance.

As for transportation, we began to look at funding non- roadway projects (sidewalks and bikeways), and establishing limits to road widening in our urban core.

Wayne: Looking more broadly, what do you see as the most challenging issues facing planners and planning commissions across the country?

Wendy: Sustainability is one. The environmental and economic consequences of the choices we have made are becoming more apparent. While changes need to be made at the larger scale (for example, energy production, automobile efficiency), we need to also make changes at the community level. This can include everything from urban form -- such as urban growth boundaries -- to site design strategies aimed at minimizing energy use (for example, building orientation for passive cooling).

Compatibility is another challenging issue. Many people support the concept of higher density and a walkable mix of uses -- just don't put a project like that next to their neighborhood! We need to do a better job working with residents to address their perceptions about higher density development. Compatibility in this context ties back to sustainability. We cannot build energy and resource efficient communities if we cannot achieve greater densities.

Wayne: Your first column for the Planning Commissioners Journal [included in the Spring issue due out the end of this month] focuses on how demographic changes can affect the demand for housing. You suggest finding areas in the community that can be rezoned to a higher density, and point out that higher densities can help reduce construction and energy costs for future development? But, as you just noted, increasing densities can be quite controversial. What approach can planners take to change peoples' perceptions?

Wendy: I don't know how the changes in the housing market will affect people's perceptions about density going forward. I think the solutions need to be site specific. You have to work within the existing context. In some neighborhoods, for example, granny flats or accessory units may be a good tool. In another neighborhood, there may be some land that can be designed for garden homes. You cannot impose a one size fits all answer.

Wayne: In your article you also mention that the recession has caused a growing number of Baby Boomers to stay put and not move to popular retirement areas. Do you think this trend [of staying put] will change as the recession ends?

Wendy: I think many factors will affect Baby Boomers' housing choices. The market changes, even if they last five years or more, are relatively short term. Demographics will play a large role in the long term, especially longevity. People used to retire to Florida and spend the rest of their lives here -- ten or fifteen years. Now that people are living longer, we see some people moving away once they reach their 80s, often to be closer to a family member who can care for them. My aunt's mother was living in Florida well into her 90s. Eventually, it became clear she could no longer live on her own. She now lives in n new assisted living facility near the retirement community of Sun City in South Carolina where my aunt -- a very active retiree -- lives!

Wayne: As a planning director you spent many years working with planning commissioners. From your experience, is there one piece of advice you'd most like to give to a new member of a planning commission?

Wendy: Feel free to question how things are done. One asset of a new commissioner is a fresh perspective. Once a planning commissioner asked why we always had our hearings on Monday. He pointed out if we had the hearings on Tuesday that would give everyone a chance on Monday to follow up on last minute questions and changes. A simple change that made things easier!

Wayne: Another question I want to ask is how to improve communications between planning commissioners and local elected officials?

Wendy: One problem is that since planning commissioners focus only on land use issues, they often delve into issues more deeply than elected officials can. However, the thinking that went into a planning commission decision is often not explained very well in agenda items to the elected officials. As a result, the work of the planning commission may not be given the weight it deserves. One way of dealing with this is for planning commissioners to hold semi-annual workshops with the elected officials to discuss major issues of concern.

Wayne: Last week I asked Dave Stauffer, who will also be joining the PCJ as a contributing writer, if there's a book he'd particularly recommend to planning commissioners. His choice was Doris Kearns Goodwin's Team of Rivals. Do you have a book you'd suggest?

Wendy: I'd recommend Ray Oldenburg's, The Great Good Place. It is a very accessible book about the value of places where people can gather. The first place is where we live and the second place is where we work. The third place is where we gather as a community -- the coffee bar, the diner, or the tavern. Successful communities have great third places that meet the needs of all segments of the population. 

Editor's note: Ray Oldenburg covered some of the central themes of his book in an article he wrote for the Planning Commissioners Journal. You're welcome to download a complimentary pdf of the article, "Our Vanishing Third Places."

"Caracas is Everywhere"

So says architect Hubert Klumpner in explaining why it's important to understand places like Caracas and how they work. About half the world's population lives in "informal cities" like the barrios sprawling over Caracas' hillsides.

Last week we highlighted Jaime Lerner and Curitiba, Brazil. This week you'll see a different picture. Your guides will be architects Klempner and his colleague at the Urban Think Tank, Alfredo Brillembourg, also an architect. It's not a highly polished video like those produced by NBC or CNN. But in many ways it offers more revealing insights.

Caracas has witnessed explosive growth. As you'll hear, due to immigration the metro area grew from about 1 million in the 1950s to 6 million today. The informal city, which houses some 4 million people, sprawls over huge hillside areas. The scope is dramatically shown in the opening few minutes of the video. Almost all of the housing is built by the people who live in it -- and you'll see some of the building materials they use. 

Posted above is Part 1 of Caracas, the Informal City, directed by Rob Schroder. Parts 2 and 3 are also available via YouTube; you can use the links below. (Unfortunately, Parts 4-6 of the documentary have not been posted). 

I found this engrossing viewing, as it shows a picture so different from what most of us in North America are familiar with. Major challenges facing the millions living in the informal city include lack of infrastructure and crime. Some of you may find especially interesting former Caracas Mayor Leopoldo Lopez's comments in Part 2 about how sports facilities can reduce reduce crime and a look at one solution, the "vertical sports hall."

More videos by Urban Think Tank on other cities are also available on YouTube.

Note: we first came across Caracas: The Informal City through a posting on the Urban Genetics web blog. Our thanks.

• Part 2: Caracas, The Informal City
• Part 3: Caracas, The Informal City
• Urban Think Tank videos on YouTube

For a good short commentary on informal cities from a global perspective, see Anthony Flint, "Improving slums, one step at a time" (Mar. 31, 2010) ("Instead of mass evictions and bulldozing, local governments are working with vast, illegally occupied settlements where they are trying to make life a little better with basic services such as electricity, water, sewer and sanitation systems, as well as what some are calling “socio-ecologic” infrastructure.").

N is for Neighborhood

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 | Zoning

order & download the complete Planning ABC's

---

To community planners, the term "neighborhood" draws on ideas propounded in England by Ebenezer Howard at the end of the 19th century. Howard postulated a community of six interlinked neighborhoods (or "wards") of about 5,000 people each, focused on an elementary school, bounded by major streets, and containing a variety of residential accommodations. Industry was located at the perimeter of the community. Commerce was focused on the community center, a few block walk from each neighborhood.

In Howard's Garden City concept, communities were not permitted to grow beyond these limits. Each Garden City was to be bounded by a publicly owned greenbelt of agricultural land that could not be built upon. When population growth required additional accommodations, a new Garden City would be built.

 Idea became reality in 1903 with construction of the first Garden City, Letchworth, England. Four years later, the first planned "neighborhood unit" to be added to an existing city was initiated at Hampstead Garden Suburb, on the outskirts of London. Hampstead's architect/planners, Raymond Unwin and Barry Parker, followed Howard's neighborhood principles in bringing order, functional efficiency, and environmental beauty to a residence-focused organization of buildings, streets, public institutions, and open spaces. Construction of America's first Garden Suburb, heavily influenced by Hampstead's example, was begun in 1910 at Forest Hills Gardens, New York.

The major American adaptation of the British neighborhood idea, however, was rooted in the one-mile square land "section" system of the Midwest. Neighborhoods were based on quarter-sections (160 acres), with major streets bounding neighborhoods one-half mile apart, and no through traffic. 

Residential densities generated by apartment and row house units resulted in a sufficient school-child-age population to support an elementary school within a quarter-mile walking distance from home. However, as early as the 1920s, emphasis on lower density single-family detached housing began to require an increase in the size of the neighborhood to assure sufficient population to support the walk-in school. 

By the late 1940s, advocates of the "neighborhood unit" were promoting neighborhoods one mile square (equal to 640 acres, a full section), with a half-mile walk to school, and major streets one mile apart on section lines.

Neighborhoods took on a new role in the 1950s and the 1960s in many cities, as neighborhood based groups led the opposition to the large-scale demolitions and dislocations resulting from redevelopment, housing projects, and in-city highway construction. Organized neighborhood associations gave residents a voice in the political process. 

Many cities officially delineated neighborhood districts, giving them a more official and on-going role in the community development process. With this often came assistance from city planners and other staff.

The coming of the birth control pill in 1960 and declining family size, in combination with continuing increases in the lot size of single-family dwellings, led to significantly lower "school-age-population-per-acre." By the 1980s, this had made the walk-in elementary school unfeasible in most neighborhoods. As a result, little was left of the neighborhood unit idea except the definition of residential districts by bounding major streets. Yet at the very point at which the neighborhood concept seemed at its nadir, two related movements, "The New Urbanism" and "Smart Growth," breathed new life into it by advocating denser, more diverse residential areas, with a mix of local retail shops and services, and a halt to low-density perimeter sprawl.

---

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

Bowling Together: The Role of Neighborhood Associations

School Sprawl

New Development, Traditional Patterns

Commissioners as Neighborhood Advocates

---

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

L is for Land Subdivision

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 | Zoning

order & download the complete Planning ABC's

---

Land ownership and subdivision in America has long been subject to detailed legal requirements and procedures. That was certainly true during America's Colonial era, as each colony prescribed the steps needed to lawfully acquire and prove ownership of land. 

Procedures for "patenting" (i.e., lawfully acquiring by deed) land typically required that a warrant be obtained allowing the land to be surveyed, and that the resulting survey plat (including a description of the property's location, size, and owner-ship) be filed with the colony's land office. Procedures for transferring land parcels were also spelled out.

Through the nation's early decades, quite large and irregularly shaped parcels were common in the East, as ownership reflected large agricultural properties which were usually defined by natural features such as stream beds and ridges. However some urban areas (most notably New Haven and Philadelphia), as early as the 17th century, adopted rectangular grid street and property systems. The grid system would reach its zenith in New York City's Plan of 1811, which established a 25 by 100 foot land subdivision unit, resulting in city blocks 200 feet deep and 600 feet long -– a pattern to be replicated in many newly developing cities.

As America expanded, Congress enacted the Land Ordinance of 1785, establishing the familiar Midwest pattern of one-mile square sections within thirty six square mile townships. Boundaries were aligned with the cardinal points of the compass. Within the grid, major streets were run along section lines and block lengths were commonly limited to 660 feet, one eighth of a section. The coming of the railroads altered this pattern to some extent, as railroad rights-of-way often ran diagonally across sections. Railroad companies established towns with gridiron streets parallel to these oblique rights-of-way for a few blocks at each side of the railroad station, beyond which the streets were adjusted lo link up with the north-south, east-west overlying grid.

By the mid-19th century, many cities were adopting "Official Maps." An Official Map illustrated the location of all public buildings, public land, and the alignment of all current and proposed future major streets. After a city adopted an Official Map, permanent buildings were barred from being constructed in future street rights-of-way.

With the increased urbanization of the late 19th and early 20th century came abuses in land subdivision, including the platting of parcels too small to build upon or without access to a public street. New streets (especially where there was no Official Map) might also have rights-of-way varying widely from one property to the next. Recognizing the need for coordination, New Jersey, in 1913, became the first state to require that each land subdivision be referred to a local agency for an advisory review before the plat was filed.

The arrival of large scale suburban development in the 1920s led to the adoption by communities across the country of detailed subdivision controls. These regulations specified minimum property width, depth, and area; minimum frontage on a public street; and minimum right-of-way, paving widths, and street curvature for new streets. They also required the "dedication" of the land in street rights-of-way to the public. It was not long before communities were expanding this dedication requirement to include the giving of land for public parks to accommodate the recreational needs of new residents.

---

For more on subdivision controls, see the following articles from the Planning Commissioners Journal:

Growing Greener: Conservation Subdivision Design

An Introduction to Subdivision Regulations

---

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

Conversation With New PCJ Contributing Writer Beth Humstone

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

I’m excited that several new contributing writers will be joining the Planning Commissioners Journal this Spring. They bring a diversity of backgrounds and interests -- but one thing they all have in common is a dedication to planning, and a strong interest in the positive role planning commissioners can play.

Over the coming weeks I’ll be introducing each of them to you, through some short interviews conducted by email correspondence. I want to start with a planner I’ve known and respected for a number of years, Beth Humstone.

Over the past 35 years, Beth has worked as a planning consultant on a wide range of projects in rural communities and small towns. She serves as an advisor to the National Trust for Historic Preservation and is a Board member of the Portland, Maine, Downtown District. Beth is the former Executive Director of the Vermont Forum on Sprawl (now Smart Growth Vermont) and is a past member of the Burlington, Vermont, Planning Commission, and former Chair of Vermont’s Housing & Conservation Trust Fund Board. She is a co-author of Above and Beyond: Visualizing Change in Small Towns and Rural Areas.

Some of you may recall that Beth wrote, "Getting the Density You Want" for our Spring 2009 issue.

Wayne: What first got you interested in planning?

Beth: I am the daughter of a city planner. When, as a child growing up on Long Island, I ventured forth from my leafy suburb with its tiny village center on the Long Island Railroad line, I observed -- often with my father’s help -- the changes brought about by highways, subdivisions, and shopping centers. At the same time, I noticed developed areas, like industrial lands in College Point, Queens, being abandoned. As growth moved further and further out from New York City consuming resources at high rates, other places were being vacated and underused. This didn’t make a lot of sense to me.

The book by Virginia Lee Burton, The Little House, also influenced me. I found it profoundly sad. The sprawl depicted seemed so inevitable. I just couldn't accept that.

I have always wanted to find a better way for communities to grow than what I saw growing up. I’m intrigued by how and why change happens and challenged by the desire of citizens for more sustainable futures in their communities and regions.

Wayne: What planning-related issues most concern you today?

Beth: Right now as an advisor from Vermont to the National Trust for Historic Preservation, I am concerned about the lack of public understanding of the critical role of preservation in community revitalization. At the national level, we are seeing preservation as a tool undermined even in the new administration. Yet, study after study illustrates that preservation is a job generator and has turned around many communities and neighborhoods that experienced serious decline.

Preservation projects have leveraged public and private dollars, made better use of existing public and private investments and brought new coalitions together. But somehow the message of the importance of preservation is not getting out, especially at the state and federal levels.

Other issues that I’m concerned about include both urban and rural abandonment and decline. We are wasting valuable resources -- infrastructure in our cities and natural resources in our rural areas. Another very important issue we’re facing across the country is the need to develop a better public transportation system. We all need to advocate for this, from local commissioners on up.

Wayne: From your experience, what can planning commissions do to position themselves to take a productive leadership role in their community? 

Beth: To take a productive leadership role, planning commissions must be credible. They must be trustworthy, dependable, reasonable, fair, informed, open, and accessible to the public -- and accountable to those who appoint or elect them. People need to know that they will get a fair hearing before a planning commission and that the commission is a source of necessary and accurate information. The planning commission is responsible for integrating and prioritizing the diverse needs and priorities of the community. This also means taking a long term view, while understanding short term needs.

Wayne: If there's one piece of advice you'd most like to give to a new member of a planning commission, what would it be? 

Beth: Read the town plan and the implementing regulations and get to know them well. They should be guiding your actions. Ask questions about them. Keep them up to date. And help others to know them as well.

Wayne: In your upcoming article for the Spring issue of the Planning Commissioners Journal (“Future Housing Demand: Problem or Opportunity”), you speak about the need of suburbs to consider raising densities and providing greater diversity in types of housing. How can planners deal with the resistance this often generates, especially when there’s talk of increased densities?

Beth: Many people have a knee jerk, negative reaction when they hear that densities may increase, often without an understanding of what it means in the context of their community or neighborhood. It is the role of the planning commissioner to communicate what more density means, what it looks like, and how it will be applied in each case and to be sensitive to the character and conditions in the places where more density will be encouraged.

Wayne: In your article, you also talk about shifting consumer preferences, especially for smaller, greener, less expensive housing? Do you see this happening nationwide, and do you think this is a long-term shift or more reflects the impact of the past year's deep recession? 

Beth: Because of the demographic changes taking place throughout the country -- in age and household composition -- and because the era of cheap oil is mostly over, I think over the long run consumer preferences will continue to shift to smaller, greener, more efficient housing. While there will be some who will still strive for a larger home, or more land, or a more remote location, for a majority I think preferences and patterns are changing.

Take a Density Quiz

Dan Zack, the Downtown Coordinator for Redwood City, California, has put together a quite interesting photo quiz on the density of various residential buildings -- primarily in Redwood City and Palo Alto. It's the type of quiz you might want to try in your own city or region. See if there are lessons you can draw from Zack's 11-minute long presentation. At the very least, you'll get a tour of parts of these two communities (with a few stops elsewhere).

I emailed Dan Zack and asked him what reaction he's received to the density quiz. Here's his reply:

I'm really happy to say that the presentation has changed the conversation among the people who have seen it. One of my main goals was to reset people's density "scale." I've seen people protest a project that was only 4 units per acre as being too dense. Sorry, but that's not dense. I'll show you dense! Also, it has given the people who have seen it a clear understanding that ugly might be low in density, and really attractive stuff might be unbelievably dense. Likewise, they understand that tall doesn't necessarily equal dense.

Zack also went on to provide four very useful tips if you're interested in putting together a similar density quiz for your community:

1. Try to use as many local examples as possible. This diffuses the "sure it works in (insert any city other than your own here), but we are sooooo different and it won't work for us" argument.

2. Don't be afraid to show REALLY dense projects in the quiz. Give people a sense of the actual spectrum of density that exists out there. If you limit the high end of your spectrum to 30 du/ac because you're afraid of freaking people out, then later when a nice townhouse project just off of the Main Street comes in at 40 du/ac, it will look psychotically dense to them. In reality, 40 du/ac is pretty moderate, when you look at the range of things on the ground in our country. So if your quiz includes a few nice projects that are over 100 or 200 (or 300) du/ac, then 40 can be seen for what it really is: not too radical, and possibly just right depending on the situation.

3. Stick with net du/ac figures. That is how projects are measured for zoning/development application purposes, and that is what is on public hearing notices that people will receive, so that is what they need to understand. Don't muddy the waters by mixing gross du/ac or persons per square mile figures into our quiz.

4. Don't try to be slick and come up with a fancy new word for density. That dang word is in every zoning ordinance in the country, and we can't get away from it. We need to redefine it and take it back, rather than hiding from it and calling it something like "compactness." People figure it out pretty quickly when you're hiding something, and then they won't trust you. Deal with it head on, and clear away the myths and misconceptions.

Take a look also at Dan Zack's complete 50 minute video presentation, "Delightful Density: the case for housing density."

For those of you taking the time to read this, we also invite you to download a complimentary pdf of an article we recently published in the Planning Commissioners Journal,  "Getting the Density You Want," by Beth Humstone (who will also be joining us as a regular contributing writer).

Finally, take a look at the "Density Resources" page posted here on the PlannersWeb.

I is for Inclusionary

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 | Zoning

order & download the complete Planning ABC's

---

Planning efforts of the mid- to late 19th century were grounded on a belief that the public interest would best be served by the exclusion of undesirable land uses, usually commercial and industrial uses, from residential areas.

 By the early 20th century, newly adopted land use zoning controls expanded on the exclusionary nature of community planning by not only physically separating industrial, commercial, and residential zones, but also by distinguishing between single-family and multi-family residential zones. This had the effect of excluding many middle-to lower-income persons -– primarily renters –- from increasingly large swaths of land which (especially by the 1920s) were being designated as single-family districts. With multi-family zones limited to already built up and often deteriorated older neighborhoods, the less well-to-do were locked into the city core.

Many municipalities "refined" their exclusionary zoning practices in the mid-20th century by creating a series of single-family-only zones of increasing minimum property size, ranging from 5,000 square feet or less to 40,000 square feet or more. Since land price is a major contributor to housing affordability, this practice resulted in concentric bands of increasing exclusion, with low and moderate income citizens unable to afford homes in lower-density perimeter residential areas.

A number of communities took income-based zoning even further by totally excluding all but single-family homes or by prohibiting manufactured housing units ("mobile homes"). By the 1970s, state courts across the nation, with rare exception, held such actions to be unconstitutional.

The 1970s also saw the emergence of a movement toward regional inclusionary housing. The Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission in Dayton, Ohio, adopted the first "fair-share" housing plan in the nation in 1970. This plan allocated affordable housing over a five-county area, with the goal of providing low- and moderate-income families with housing opportunities not just in the city of Dayton, but in all thirty-one surrounding municipalities and townships.

The focal point of the inclusionary housing movement, however, was New Jersey. In 1975, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued its landmark ruling in the case of Southern Burlington County NAACP v. Township of Mount Laurel (commonly referred to as Mt. Laurel I). The Court held that every developing community (one not already totally "built out") had a constitutional obligation to provide its fair-share of its region's affordable housing needs. Any use of the local zoning power that did not fulfill such an inclusionary requirement was unconstitutional.

Eight years later, the New Jersey Supreme Court expanded on its Mount Laurel I ruling by setting out guidelines and procedures for how "fair-share" obligations were to be met. This Mount Laurel II ruling led to the State Legislature's passage of the Fair Housing Act of 1985, which created a Council on Affordable Housing (COAH). Municipal plans had to include housing elements and fair-share plans. COAH, in turn, would certify the local housing plan's consistency with criteria designed to "make the achievement of the municipality's fair-share of low and moderate income housing realistically possible."

A growing number of cities and counties have adopted "inclusionary zoning ordinances" requiring developers to include a percentage of affordable housing units as part of new developments. A variety of other inclusionary techniques have also been used. "Linkage fee" programs, for example, link the approval of new commercial or office development with a requirement that the developer provide affordable housing units, or in-lieu fees. The goal is to provide housing opportunities for workers who would otherwise be unable to afford to live in the community.

Inclusionary development policies, by considering the impact of public actions on housing availability for all citizens of the community and region, have resulted in significant progress toward the realization of a just society.

---

For more on exclusionary and inclusionary housing policies, see the following articles from the Planning Commissioners Journal:

Single-Family-Only Zones

American Zoning & the Physical Isolation of Uses

Providing Affordable Housing

The Changing Face of Manufactured Housing

Why Not in our Back Yard?

---

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