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)

Interview with Mary Tracy of Scenic America about Billboards

Note from PCJ Editor Wayne Senville: To round out our coverage of the impacts of billboards, we thought it important to also hear from Scenic America, an organization that focuses -- as their President notes below -- on “preserving and enhancing the visual character of our nation’s roadways, communities, and countryside.” 

Again, I encourage you to weigh in with your own views about billboards on our Linkedin group page (you need to be registered on Linkedin to access this). There have already been a wide range of interesting comments posted there. 

Our previous postings related to billboards include:

• Interview with Ed McMahon about his article, "Billboards: The Case for Control"
• Article: "Billboards: The Case for Control" (available to download)
• Response from Outdoor Advertising Association of America to McMahon article
• "So You're From Vermont" -- perspectives of PCJ Editor Wayne Senville

---

Note: the photos included below were provided by Scenic America

Wayne Senville: Mary, you’re President of an organization called Scenic America. Can you tell us a little about what Scenic America does?

Mary Tracy: Two years ago, I became the president of Scenic America, an organization that I have been deeply committed to for the past twenty years. It is the only national nonprofit organization dedicated to preserving and enhancing the visual character of our nation’s roadways, communities, and countryside. We accomplish this mission through outreach and advocacy efforts, and with the help of over twenty state and local affiliates.

We are the sole national counterweight to the multi-billion dollar outdoor advertising industry, yet we are mostly a network of volunteer organizations whose financial resources are dwarfed by the industry’s. We focus our efforts where we can be most effective: helping citizens make their voices heard. When the public is allowed to speak, they voice a preference for beauty over blight.

Wayne Senville: I want to ask you a couple of questions about billboards. First of all, aren’t most billboards used by local businesses, and aren't billboards also important in promoting tourism?

Mary Tracy: According to a fact sheet prepared by the Outdoor Advertising Association of America, the three biggest users of billboards are McDonald’s, Verizon, and AT&T. All of the top 20 billboard users are large corporations, such as Coca-Cola, Anheuser-Busch, and US Cellular, who use billboards simply as a form of “brand reinforcement” among the traveling public. We’ve spoken with many business owners who say they’d prefer not to use billboards at all; they only use them because their competition does. They’ve told us they’d prefer a level playing field where no one is using billboards.

Additionally, the inference that billboards are essential tools for tourism agencies is just plain wrong. The four states that ban billboards all have economies highly dependent on tourism. In fact, tourism spending in Vermont rose 50 percent in the two years after the state removed its last billboard. [Source: "Vermont Travel Estimates Out-of-State Visitors." 1982. Vermont Division of Research and Statistics]. Celebrating the 30th anniversary of Maine’s billboard ban, Dana Connors, president of the Maine State Chamber of Commerce, said “It's become part of our quality of place.”

Wayne Senville: If the removal of billboards in these four states has proven to be a success, why haven’t more states joined in banning billboards?

Mary Tracy: Billboard companies and their various trade associations spend millions of dollars annually aggressively lobbying all levels of government, but in particular the industry works to influence regulation at the state level. Part of the reason for this is they receive the least amount of public scrutiny at this level; when called before city councils or local planning commissions to speak on sign ordinances, they are met with a public who is passionately anti-blight and eager to protect their neighborhoods.

Last year the industry was unsuccessful in its attempts to overturn Durham, North Carolina’s longstanding billboard ban and erect digital billboards. Since they lost that fight, they are now working on legislation that will remove local control.

In fact, there is currently a concerted effort by the billboard industry to eliminate local control over sign regulation. Bills have been introduced in four states -- Missouri, North Carolina, Florida, and Texas -- that would take control of billboards away from localities and give it to the state. 

The federal government has also made it difficult for states to remove billboards. Congress has prevented states from using amortization as a tool to remove the thousands of nonconforming billboards along interstate and federal-aid primary highways, instead requiring cash compensation, the funds for which simply no longer exist.

Wayne Senville: Assuming local hands are not tied by state legislation, are there things communities can do to reduce the number of billboards?

Mary Tracy: The first and most important step to reducing sign blight is to prohibit the construction of new billboards, like thousands of communities across the country have already done. This will ultimately result in fewer billboards as some are lost to attrition, some to Mother Nature and others to development. When Houston banned new billboards in 1980, there were some 10,000 signs in the city; today, there are fewer than 3,000.

What's "Sustainable"?

Sustainability may be hard to define, but it’s increasingly being discussed by developers and local planning commissions. by Dave Stauffer; from PCJ #80 (Fall 2010) -- see also our April conversation with Dave Stauffer, one of our contributing writers. We're making available the full text of Stauffer's article below; you can also download a complimentary pdf of the article.

If your commission is like the one in my town, more developers and applicants are loading their project designs with features intended to impress you because they're "sustainable." But ask them what they mean by sustainable and you're likely to get responses ranging from a blank look to a treatise on every person's obligation to help save the planet. So, what's "sustainable"? The most common definition seems to be that offered by the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development's 1987 Brundtland Report, stating that sustainable development "meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." The International Institute for Sustainable Development quotes the U.N. definition and adds, "The concept of sustainable development ... helps us understand ourselves and our world. The problems we face are complex and serious -- and we can't address them in the same way we created them. But we can address them." According to the contributors to Wikipedia, "Sustainable development is a pattern of resource use that aims to meet human needs while preserving the environment so that these needs can be met not only in the present, but also for future generations." Others reach back in history to cite, for example, the "Great Law of the Iroquois" American Indian tribe, which supposedly commanded sustainability by declaring, "In every deliberation we must consider the impact on the seventh generation." For the past few years, as chairman of a regional business group [the Yellowstone Business Partnership] whose below-the-logo tagline is "Advancing Sustainable Enterprise," I've read and heard a lot about sustainability and sustainable development. Among my conclusions: We're a long way, in consensus and time, from universal agreement on a definition of sustainability. It's nice, but not crucial, that we agree on a definition. What is crucial is that we who are asked to weigh claims of sustainability come up with a practical definition that we can use day-to-day to make the decisions that come before us. That's no simple task. Opinions on a project's sustainability will often range widely among commissioners. Moreover, assessing a project's attributes will seldom be a matter of black or white, but rather a frustrating grey. But grey terms are nothing new for us; we toil in a realm of squishy definitions. What's the pay range, for example, of a "well-paying job"? What project attributes constitute "responsible" development? We shouldn't -- and in my opinion can't -- shy away from our own determination of whether project features really are sustainable. How might we do that? Make developers or applicants do the heavy lifting. When they tout their project's sustainability, ask how they define that term. Then ask them to explain how their sustainable features meet that definition. Don't settle for generalities: get names of processes, materials, and methods. Also be sure to ask what additional up-front amount they're spending, beyond regulatory requirements, to achieve long-run sustainability. Give an "A" for effort. Sustainability means different things to different people, has no widely accepted metrics, and -- truth to tell -- few projects that come before us can be called sustainable. So (without ignoring any stated requirements for project approval) cut some slack for applicants who show you they've made a commendable effort to fashion a project that conserves resources, respects its surroundings, and is built to last. Devise and think through your own list of sustainable project features. My current list (always subject to change) includes attributes of: Scale -- a good fit with neighbors, neither ramshackle nor grandiose. Access and mobility -- it's easy to get into, out of, and around in. Consumption & waste -- efforts to minimize are evident and effective. Re-use -- makes use of recycled building materials when feasible. Location & siting -- makes the most of orientation to sun, topography, wind, natural and manmade infrastructure. Absence -- preserves open space and is no larger than necessary for its functions. Stay flexible in defining sustainability. There's nothing wrong with a changing concept of what sustainability is or how a project achieves it; sustainability as its own field of study is far from mature. As you review more applications that claim sustainability, stay open to refining your own criteria. Given the state of our world today, especially our accelerating depletion of natural resources and rising costs of manmade resources, sustainability is certain to gain ever-increasing attention. It may be hard to define, but it's vitally important to our communities. Dave Stauffer is a freelance writer and chairman of the Yellowstone Business Partnership. He is a former city planner, planning commission chair, and city council member in Red Lodge, Montana. Stauffer regularly writes for the PCJ. For excerpts from his previous articles.

Understanding Regional Retail Development

Retail development has major impacts on communities and regions. Planners can stay ahead of the curve by understanding the regional retail market and helping shape where retail will best fit. by Beth Humstone; from PCJ #80 (Fall 2010); 3 pages 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

On the corner. In the downtown. Along highway strips. At interchanges. Retail development is a significant land use in virtually every community. It has its own demands and impacts that are distinct from offices or services. One only has to look at the acres of parking and traffic congestion commonly associated with shopping centers to understand this. In many communities today, the supply of retail space exceeds the demand for it. There are vacancies in downtowns, strip centers, and shopping malls. We have over-zoned land for retail development and in the process have spread it out across the landscape. So how does a planning commissioner determine where retail development should go and how it should be designed and accommodated? Regional Retail Market Analysis The first step in planning for retail development is to undertake a regional market analysis. Shopping is largely a regional experience. In spite of the interest in buying locally, most consumers do travel around a region for shopping purposes as not all goods are provided in each community. In addition, people often shop where they work -- which is often in a different part of their region. Regional retail market analyses are typically conducted by regional planning commissions, chambers of commerce, or regional development agencies. Some analyses are undertaken in response to major retail development proposals; others in anticipation of retail changes or needs. Planners should be cautioned about developers' or retailers' market analyses as they may be skewed towards favoring a specific proposal. A retail market analysis estimates the potential growth in retail demand and compares that to the supply of retail facilities within the trade area. Information is compiled on population growth, income, and expenditures by retail type (groceries, apparel, furnishings, etc.). From these projections, estimates of retail sales and square footage demand for different types of retail stores in the region can be obtained. The analyst will also consider what share of sales will take place online, especially important since some goods, such as computers, have a high share of online purchases. Sidebar, E-Commerce. Next, a community-by-community inventory of existing retail space and occupancy rates is conducted. This inventory will show where the retail areas are within the trade area. A comparison between the existing available space and the projected space needs can be made and gaps identified. Most market analyses distinguish between convenience goods and comparison goods. Convenience goods are widely distributed, less expensive, and frequently purchased items. Examples include food, newspapers, and gas. Comparison goods are purchased at less frequent intervals and are generally more expensive; they also are often purchased after examining prices at several stores. Examples of comparison goods include major appliances, furniture, and sporting goods. The regional market analysis will indicate the extent to which the region may already be "over-stored" (more space than demand justifies) or "under-stored" (less space than demand justifies) with either convenience or comparison goods. It may even point out areas where future shopping should be planned. ... article continues [to order the complete article, use Shopping Cart button below]

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 Hannah Twaddell & Gary Toth about their article "Transportation Planning for Livable Communities"

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

Our recently published Fall issue includes a fascinating and timely article by Hannah Twaddell and Gary Toth, “Transportation Planning for Livable Communities: Measuring What Matters.” Hannah and Gary cover some very important, but often confusing, subjects that citizen planners (and professional planners, too!) need to be familiar with -- in particular, the role of “level of service” standards (commonly referred to as “LOS”) and the relationship between mobility and accessibility.

We thought it would be helpful to further explore these topics with Hannah and Gary -- and we hope that the discussion below provides a good supplement to what you’ll be reading in their article in the Planning Commissioners Journal.

By way of background, Hannah Twaddell is a Principal Planner in the Charlottesville, Virginia, office of Renaissance Planning Group. Her articles on transportation planning topics appear regularly in the Planning Commissioners Journal; many are included in our two reprint collections: Transportation: Getting Started and Transportation: New Directions.

Gary Toth is the Senior Director of Transportation Initiatives at the Project for Public Spaces. Gary worked for more than 30 years with the New Jersey Department of Transportation, where he spearheaded many innovative projects and programs to promote techniques such as context sensitive solutions, complete streets, transit-oriented development, and smart growth. Gary has authored A Citizen’s Guide for Better Streets: How to Engage Your Transportation Agency (available as a pdf download); created a Healthy Living by Design training module for the Centers for Disease Control; and developed a Streets as Places training module for the Main Street program of the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

Wayne Senville:

First off, I want to thank both of you for taking the time to further explore what you covered in your article “Transportation Planning for Livable Communities,” now out in our Fall issue.

You start the article by focusing on what you say is our over-reliance on “level of service” standards in designing roadways. But aren’t LOS standards easy to use and understand, and don’t they focus on accomplishing something almost everyone wants: reducing congestion?

Gary Toth:

LOS standards are easy to understand, which is what makes them so dangerous. They take a very subjective experience like how we react to congestion and boil it down to the pretense of an objective measurement, creating the illusion of science and objectively. What’s more sinister, it uses a scale of A to F that resonates subconsciously and totally with every American.

Hannah Twaddell:

The simple nature of LOS letter grades may be easy to grasp intuitively, but few people other than transportation professionals have any notion of the rationale that goes into creating them (and, sadly, many transportation planners and engineers don’t understand the inner workings of LOS either). It’s remarkable to me that so many educated, smart people just accept being told that LOS is the best and only indicator of roadway performance, and they don’t question how it’s derived.

We don’t do this in other areas of life. For example, most of the parents in my daughter’s school system don’t just meekly accept poor grades on their kids’ report cards without trying to find out what’s going on and what can be done about it. Because of this community-driven pressure, coupled with local, state and federal mandates, my daughter’s teachers send me simple but comprehensive reports that document clearly each of the factors that contribute to her overall grade.

Gary Toth:

The reality is that asking someone the simple question: “do you want congestion reduced at a particular location” is a question out of context. It is like asking someone whether they want to never be stung by a bee again. Of course, the answer will be yes.

But what if the question is “Would you like me to apply chemicals that completely eliminate bees from the planet, thereby reducing your risk but of course also meaning that we will never be able to have plants, fruits and vegetables again?” OK, perhaps an extreme analogy, but the point is that we need to be asking our citizens bigger questions. For instance, “do you want us to widen your Main Street if it means unintended consequences of erosion of your CBD, increasing reliance on use of your car, and ultimately more congestion”

So what we need are broader community performance measures, with LOS not eliminated but considered within the broader context. Elimination of congestion could be good, but only if it contributes to broader quality of life goals in a community or region.

Hannah Twaddell:

If we made a point of breaking down the components of LOS clearly -- showing what is and, perhaps more importantly, is not considered a contributing factor -- planners, local officials, community members, and highway engineers might be able to communicate more effectively about what’s really going on and how we could address it.

Congestion is obviously an important performance measure. But it’s important to remember that a roadway with minimal congestion problems may be performing poorly in other ways. And the root causes of congestion along any given corridor could be traced to larger network or land use issues that might not be fixed -- and could even be exacerbated -- by widening the “problem” corridor until its LOS grades improve.

Wayne Senville:

In your article, you urge community leaders to “engage with transportation agencies to customize level of service expectations for different contexts along corridors.” Do you see evidence that state transportation agencies are growing more responsive to this?

New Ways to Weigh Economy vs. Environment

A longstanding debate is again heating up over whether we should favor job creation and economic gain over environmental protection and public health. by Dave Stauffer; from PCJ #79 (Summer 2010); 1 page -- see our conversation with Dave Stauffer, one of our new contributing writers. Read excerpts below; to order & download the full article use Shopping Cart button at bottom of this post.

A longstanding debate is again heating up. The debate, that is, over whether a nation, state, or community should favor job creation and economic gain over benefits such as environmental protection and public health. One example, as I write this in May, is raging in California over implementation of a law that would slash the state's greenhouse gas emissions. A proposed ballot petition would delay the law until California's current unemployment rate is cut by more than half. One side's research the law could cost 1.1 million jobs, while the other side's findings say the law would reduce California's overall fuel expenses $3.8 billion by 2020. On the local turf more familiar to planning commissioners, my community is engaged in an increasingly vituperative spat over installation of a gravel pit operation, to be situated across the street from an upscale subdivision. The battle is characterized as jobs and economy versus public health and "quality of life." I would expect that you, along with any seasoned planning commissioner, have had to wrestle with some form of this debate. Take heart: We're increasingly seeing means by which we can escape, or at least minimize, the toxic charges and countercharges common to these tiffs. The first is through advances in quantifying the previously unquantifiable. An early adopter of quantification is the Sierra Business Council (SBC), a California-Nevada regional alliance that compiles what it calls the "Sierra Nevada Wealth Index." The index measures the social, natural, and financial capital -- the so-called triple bottom line -- of SBC's region. The index tabulates 18 mostly familiar measures of financial capital, but it also reports 15 measures of social capital, including funding for the arts and high school seniors' average SAT college-entrance scores, and 20 measures of natural capital, such as acreage of parks and public lands and air particulate matter. ... article continues

order & download full article $2.75 (single copy license)
order & download full article $10.00 (license to print/store up to 20 copies of article)
25% off the above prices for Planning Commissioners Journal subscribers. Use this link to activate your discount. Not yet a subscriber, you can subscribe now and then take the discount.

Give My Regards to Broadway

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

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

Pavement into Parks

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

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

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

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

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

For more details about the Pavement to Parks program.

In Our Spring Issue: "Coping With Economic Meltdown"

How strong is your local economy? Is there a role for planning commissioners in addressing local economic development? The first of a series of columns by planner Gwendolyn Hallsmith. by Gwendolyn Hallsmith; from PCJ #78 (Spring 2010); 1 page -- see our conversation with Gwendolyn Hallsmith, one of our new contributing writers. Read first half of the article below; to order & download the full article use Shopping Cart button at bottom of this post.

Read first half of article: You are sitting in a public hearing about the zoning changes you have been preparing for the past year, fighting a sense of despair and futility. More projects have been abandoned than have been started. Money is tight -- at least one of the cancelled projects lost its financing at the last minute. More than ever, it feels as if the title "Planning Commissioner" doesn't reflect your role -- shouldn't planners be able to offer a path forward, even through dark times? The local economic development authority has been working as hard as they can to attract new businesses. They spend money, even in the downturn, on trips to distant places to try and find the next big new enterprise to bring to town. They often return empty-handed. The economy elsewhere suffers the same sluggishness as here at home, they say. Maybe when things pick up they'll have better luck. Is this search for external investment the best strategy for strengthening the local economy? Consider this: 1. The vast majority of new jobs are created by small and medium sized firms, not large employers. 2. New markets, jobs, capital, technology, and economic expansion are generated when cities start to produce goods and services that were previously provided by distant exporters. 3. Start-up, innovative, entrepreneurial enterprises are on the increase in the 21st Century, while the large manufacturers that dominated the economies of the 19th and 20th Centuries are declining. 4. Local long-term wealth creation and economic security are dependent on local ownership of productive capacity; simply receiving wages for employment while the profits are exported to distant corporate centers robs the local economy of the capital it needs to succeed. 5. An over-reliance on export-led development can undermine the long-term economic health of a community. More attention needs to be paid to local needs and markets. Similarly, communities that develop local exchange systems and reduce reliance on the national currency will also enhance long-term local wealth creation. 6. Companies that are locally owned are much more sensitive to community needs and environmental conditions, and can lessen a city or town's vulnerability to job losses when economic downturns occur. If the solution to your economic problems can be solved through local action, then perhaps there is more of a role for planning commissioners than you have been taking. ...

order & download full article $2.75 (single copy license)
order & download full article $10.00 (license to print/store up to 20 copies of article)

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.

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."

Make Boston the Hub of Municipal Innovation

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 Mayor Thomas M. Menino
Inaugural Address (Jan. 4, 2010) -- read complete text (pdf); excerpts below:

Today, knowing that all of our potential remains, we inaugurate a new era of shared innovation. What will be some hallmarks of this era? A long list of goals includes four I highlight today: Transforming education, delivering on our waterfront and new jobs, making over basic city services, and bringing our city together across diverse backgrounds.

[see complete text for Menino's comments on Goal 1, transforming education]

Goal two in this term is to unlock the potential of our city in Downtown Crossing, Dudley Square, and the Albany Street Corridor, and to deliver on the promise of our marine industrial park and waterfront by turning them into a vibrant Innovation District. 

A new approach is called for on the waterfront -- one that is both more deliberate and more experimental. Together, we should develop these thousand acres into a hub for knowledge workers and creative jobs. We’ll define innovation clusters -- in green, biotech and health care, web development, and other industries. And there, we’ll experiment with alternative housing models. We will test new ideas that provide live/work opportunities to entrepreneurs and affordable co-housing for researchers.

Years of financial engineering left us with a sub-prime crisis in housing. It’s time to get back to “engineering engineering.” We’ll give architects and developers the challenge to experiment with new designs, new floor plans, and new materials. Our mandate to all will be to invent a 21st century district that meets the needs of the innovators who live and work in Boston -- to create a job magnet, an urban lab on our shore, and to harvest its lessons for the city.

Goal three is to transform our delivery of basic city services and usher in a wave of municipal innovation. Sixteen years ago I was labeled the Urban Mechanic and described as a sort of one-man “Mr. Fix-it” when it came to the basics that make our city work. The nickname was overstated then, but it’s outdated now -- we are all urban mechanics.

Smartphones, GPS, wireless technology, and a resurgent spirit of civic engagement mean that all of us are eyes and ears on the streets, that neighbors are our greatest source of data, and our citizens the best civic entrepreneurs. It’s time to build on our early experiments, deliver on projects we’ve dreamed up, and make Boston a proving ground for dozens of novel solutions.

 This is an open call to foundations, entrepreneurs, technologists, and neighbors: Help us make Boston the hub of municipal innovation. Be the heart of this approach -- one we call New Urban Mechanics -- and make sure it delivers on the noble promise we make to all of our residents: to provide neighborhoods that work for them and their families.

[see complete text for Menino's comments on Goal 4, bringing city together]

There will be a substantial wind at our backs because in many ways, changes in the world have come to us. Social networking is a new way of saying what we have long held dear -- we accomplish more when we engage people. Concerns about inequalities remind us of what we have always felt -- a city works best when it works for all of its residents. Market failures in the last few years confirm for us, in this cradle of democracy, that yes, government still has a positive role to play in people’s lives. There is no place on earth better positioned to meet the challenges of a new decade or to make use of its new tools than here in Boston.

A new day of shared innovation lies ahead for all of us, and we carry into it all the talent, fortitude, and creativity that have brought us here.

Just Like in Baseball, the Fundamentals Remain the Same

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 Mayor R.T. Rybak
State of the City Address (to read the full address given on March 10, 2010); excerpts below:

An economic tornado has ripped through the heart of our city, our country and the global economy. In those months that followed we began to look up and survey the damage. We've been shocked by what we have seen.   

At the end of 2007, the official beginning of the recession, unemployment in Minneapolis stood at 4.3%. Today, it stands at 6.8% -- after peaking in July 2009 at 8.4%.

At the end of 2007, the retail-vacancy rate hovered around 6.0%. Today, it stands at 10.5%

In the middle of 2008, the average traditional-sale price of Minneapolis home was $220,000. Today it stands at $193,500. That's $26,500 less in wealth that the average Minneapolis homeowner can count on.

... The economic devastation in the economy also has a direct impact on basic services in the city. With the state budget in deep crisis, part of the solution proposed by the governor has been to cut an additional $29 million from the City. These are the funds we use to pay for police, fire, road maintenance and other basic services. I am currently working with our finance team and Council leadership to develop a supplemental budget based on deep state cuts. I will present it in early April. It won’t be pretty.

There are some signs, however, that we are turning a corner. Just yesterday, Forbes Magazine ranked Minneapolis Saint Paul the #4 metropolitan area in the country where the recession is easing. Still, even an optimist like me wonders whether we can ever get back to where we were before. But in the year and a half since the economy collapsed, all parts of this city have found a way to make progress. 

... in President Obama we finally have a champion at the federal level. When I stood here one year ago, the president's economic-recovery plan had only just passed. One year later, we've seen what it's meant: Minneapolis alone is benefitting from $60 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. We will continue to feel the positive effect of that assistance through this year.

We also have never had such strong partnerships with regional partners. We are working with both the Itasca Group, a coalition of regional CEOs, and the Regional Conference of Mayors on a regional economic development strategies. We have also never worked more closely with Mayor Chris Coleman and the City of Saint Paul, especially on green jobs and transit.

We are like the Twins -- we're playing on a whole new field. But just like in baseball, the fundamentals remain the same. 

... The first fundamental is investing in people. In 2003, we merged Minneapolis' successful job-placement programs into a more powerful department of Community Planning and Economic Development. Since then, we have helped place nearly 11,000 people get training and good jobs. ... Minneapolis is also a national leader in partnering with the business community to develop the workforce for tomorrow. Since 2002, we have placed more than 11,000 young people from Minneapolis in summer jobs, the majority of them through STEP-UP. Last summer alone, we found jobs for 2,270 young people.

... Six years ago, unemployment was one percentage point higher in the city than in the surrounding suburbs. Now, for the first time in decades, unemployment in Minneapolis is below the suburbs, the state and the nation.

... All this effort to develop the workforce is the first, and most important, fundamental in creating jobs. The second fundamental is to invest in the common ground that helps everyone succeed. The common ground includes five key elements: (1) safe neighborhoods; (2) stable neighborhoods; (3) technology infrastructure; (4) well-maintained roads and bridges; (5) expanded transit options. 

Investing in common ground starts with making every neighborhood a Safe Place to Call Home. This has been the top priority of our city government for eight years and that focus has paid off ...  The common ground also including helping neighborhoods stay stable. First, that means preventing foreclosures when we can. Foreclosure counseling and prevention costs the City an average of $500 per household -- but foreclosure costs the public and private lenders an average of $68,000 per household. In 2009, the City helped prevent close to 500 foreclosures -- which means that for an investment of around $25,000, we saved over $30 million in costs.

... The common ground includes technology infrastructure. The Minneapolis wireless network is now complete, and USI Wireless now has over 16,000 residential subscribers. Over 50 Community Technology Centers have free wi-fi access, and this spring here will be over 100 free outdoor wi-fi hot spots throughout the city. Minneapolis continues to lead the way as the first large city to build such a network.

The third fundamental is investing in small business. Too often, economic development means special assistance to just a lucky few big players. But there’s a better way to do it. When government does provide assistance to businesses, it needs to be focused on the job-creation sweet spot of the partnership between the public and private sectors -- and that's small business, where most jobs are grown.

 About five years ago, we began unifying several previously disconnected City programs for small business into a unified effort called Great Streets. To someone who wants to open or expand a business on a commercial street, Great Streets offers gap financing, low-interest loans, façade-improvement matching grants, and business plans and marketing assistance. Since 2007, we have invested $3.7 million on commercial corridors throughout Minneapolis.

... Knowing when to help, and when to get out of the way. With Minneapolis Development Review, we have also streamlined the City's development review processes. In 2005, it took an average of 37 days for the City to route formal development plans. In 2009, it took an average of 10 days. ... In the past year, we integrated Business Licensing into the Service Center, so now, partners can receive new or renewal licenses and obtain permits for many construction-related jobs the same day -- all in one location. ... We've established a Business Development presence at the Service Center so small businesses can meet with City staff to obtain information on low-interest loans and the other services we provide for small businesses.

We're also processing more and more permits via the Internet. In 2003, we processed exactly zero permits on the Internet. Last year, we processed 21% of all permits via the Internet.

... Our greatest challenge right now is the challenge of putting people to work. No one can wave a magic wand and suddenly make jobs appear, especially not now.  There isn’t one single action to take, and nothing right now is easy.  But we know what works:

• Invest in people and the common ground that helps everyone succeed.
• Invest in small business, and innovation.
• Know when to help and when to get out of the way.

79% Say No to Hand-Held Cellphone Use or Texting While Driving

The final results of our March online poll are set out below. While the poll was not based on any statistical sampling, we still find the results interesting, especially in the overwhelming percentage of responses favoring the prohibition of hand-held cellphones while driving. Many, however, found a distinction between hand-held and hands-free use -- with the largest block of votes for banning hand-held use and texting, but allowing hands-free cellphones. You can also view the comments several individuals left after voting.

 

What Brand is Your City?

The idea -- and process -- of identifying, shaping, and promoting a particular image of a city or neighborhood has come to the fore in both the academic and popular press. It's called "branding." 

Branding, you may recall, was one of the top priorities Riverside, California, Mayor Ronald O. Loveridge identified in his State of the City address (see our News, Notes, & Quotes posting yesterday).

Certainly, many cities have long had distinctive identities, and have been known -- sometimes worldwide -- for certain characteristics. Think: Chicago, The Windy City; Paris, City of Light. But in today's competitive economic environment, with cities clawing for new businesses and for tourist dollars, identities that emerged gradually over time -- and may not have even been particularly appealing -- are now being instantly forged with the help of advertising (oops, communications) firms and media conscious chambers of commerce and elected officials. 

Here's a short excerpt, for example, from a recent article by Roger Yu in USA Today: Cities use destination branding to lure tourists (Feb. 11, 2010)

 "Tom Biedenharn's new business cards contain a recruiting message: 'Dayton Patented. Originals Wanted.' The cards are a reminder that the city was once a place of innovation and is again serious about recruiting such talent, says Biedenharn, Dayton's public affairs manager.

'Destination branding,' such as Dayton is undertaking, is back in vogue as cities and states pursue image makeovers designed to help them stand out in the weak global economy, attract visitors and even lure people who might relocate.

City slogans have been around for decades. But image branding is taking on more urgency as visitors and meeting planners become more discriminating in spending their shrinking budgets. ... 

For cities such as Dayton, Fresno and Cleveland, branding goes beyond tourism. It aims for a new identity that can stir local communities out of economic doldrums. ..." 

Dayton even cleverly highlights its branding campaign on the city's web site -- asking visitors to nominate a Dayton "original." Selected people (and places) are then highlighted.

There's also a new brand name for venerable Providence, Rhode Island:

As Philip Marcelo reports in the Providence Journal, ‘Creative Capital’ Providence found inspiration elsewhere (Mar. 30, 2009):

Goodbye, Renaissance City. So long, Beehive of Industry. The city has a new catchphrase, if you haven’t heard. ... Gradually, official stationery, business cards and the city’s Web site are being updated to reflect the new aesthetic, which has the clean, spare look of the start-up companies that the city is trying to entice. ... Mayor David N. Cicilline is rebranding the city as a center for creativity and innovation, the sort of place where the so-called knowledge-based industries would want to locate.

The city hired a pair of firms for a total of about $100,000 so far to come up with the concepts and designs. ... Seven companies, five of them out of state, replied. ... North Star was chosen with a low bid of about $75,000; it has done rebrands for Dayton, Ohio (“Originals Wanted”); Fairbanks, Alaska (“Light Energy Warmth”); Texarkana, Texas (“Western Spirit Served with Southern Hospitality”); and Gainesville, Fla. (“Every Path Starts with Passion”), to name a few. In New England, it came up with the Yarmouth, Mass., tagline “Cape Cod. Within Reach.”

Another city that has just recently branded itself is Regina, Saskatchewan. As reported by Bruce Johnstone in The Leader-Post (Feb. 9, 2010):

"Regina has a brand new brand in the form of a stylized letter R and a new slogan -- "infinite horizons" -- to convey the city's boundless opportunities and enviable quality of life. Mayor Pat Fiacco unveiled the city's new brand at his annual State of the City address ... Fiacco said the new brand, developed over 18 months for $320,000 by Winnipeg advertising firm McKim Cringan George, will help promote the city, both inside and outside the province. ...

Following his address, Fiacco said spending close to $400,000 in developing a brand should more than pay for itself in population growth and job creation. 'It's the cost of doing business. Cities who do nothing, get nothing.' In fact, Fiacco said every new citizen adds $40,000 in per capita GDP to the local economy. 'So if we get 10 new people, this pretty much pays for itself over the course of time.' "

The City has even posted a Q&A page on its web site explaining what the new brand means and how it can be used.

Some interesting observations on branding come from Otis White of Civic Strategies:

"Cities are in a lather these days about branding, and the list of cities actively searching for a 'brand' (the image that pops in your head when you think of a place) is long indeed: Chicago, Denver, Dallas and on and on. What these places are learning, though, is that it's infinitely harder to create a credible brand for a city than for, say, household detergent. ... For one thing, cities aren't discrete products. You can't reformulate them, relaunch them or shut them down if they're underperforming. Also, 'place marketing' almost always involves a lot of interests, some of which do not see eye to eye. 

So is all this branding stuff hopeless? No, experts say, but cities need to proceed realistically. ...  First, they shouldn't aim to be too specific with their images; the goal should be to create an "umbrella brand" that nearly everyone can live with. ... Second, branding efforts should proceed with a lot of public outreach. 'To deliver,' one expert said, 'everyone must believe in the brand.' " 

A Brand New Year: Riverside Says Goodbye to "Happy Side"

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 
To read his complete State of the City address  (pdf)

Editor's Note: In the excerpt below, to save room we've only included the full text of the Mayor's first, second, and ninth key policy initiatives. I should also note that Mayor Loveridge currently serves as President of the National League of Cities.

At last year’s State of the City, I recommended that we should initiate and develop a new economic strategic plan. The Council of Economic Development Advisers and Workforce Advisory Panel started a strategic visioning process, with the goal of being forward looking and highly aspirational.

A Steering Committee was invited to represent the community and oversee the process. Public comment was sought with more than 400 people participating.

The result was “Seizing our Destiny.” It is based on the premise that increasing the quality of life enhances smart growth, encourages innovation, positions Riverside as the city of choice, and perhaps most importantly, attracts good businesses and good jobs. ...

As the City implements “Seizing Our Destiny,” I strongly recommend for the Strategic Routes, as Mayor, nine policy emphases in 2010.

First is CLIP, or Communities Learning In Partnership.

Riverside is one of seven city finalists for a major grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation ... The purpose is to improve post secondary success, especially for low-income young adults. It is a wide ranging, collaborative partnership. Noteworthy, by being selected as a finalist, we have been awarded $150,000 to prepare a strategic plan.

This is a transformative proposal. It centers on the City’s major economic weakness, too many residents lack a post secondary education. CLIP strategic partners will focus on identifying resources as well as gaps in data, services, and instruction.

Urban experts stress that the single most important characteristic of successful cities is Talent. There is a very close relationship between education and income level, and the wealth and success of a city. CLIP is now before us -- it is our best opportunity to expand our Talent.

Second, 2010 is the Year of the Fox.

The Fox Theater has a storied 80 year history, primarily as a movie theater. However, in 2010 Fox’s future is being reinvented as a premier, state of the art 1,600-seat performing arts theater.

The Fox is Riverside's signature statement as a City of Arts and Innovation. It is our commitment to artistic excellence and to audience enjoyment, for the City, Inland Empire, and all of Southern California.

The Fox Theater is more than an entertainment venue. It is a statement of place. It is connected to an exciting and vibrant downtown, to fine dining, to the best of historic architecture, and to where walking can be enjoyed with safety and interesting vistas. ...

The third proposal is a green jobs strategy. In 2010, we need a Green Economic Game Plan, and especially a green jobs strategy. ...

Fourth is the Santa Ana River. By 2012, there will be a completed trail along the Santa Ana River, with signage and linkages between the Seven Oaks Dam and Huntington Beach. ...

Fifth, arts initiatives need to take off in 2010. ...

Sixth, as we compete for residents in 2010, special City Hall attention should be given to the City’s neighborhoods. ...

We live in neighborhoods -- it is where quality of life is experienced. Good neighborhoods are the building blocks of a good community and a successful economy. ...

Seventh, the Citrus Park should be the center stage of a major cultural heritage tourism program. ...

Eighth, in 2010, the High Speed Rail Commission will decide whether there will be a station in Riverside, or in Corona. ...

And the ninth is the branding of Riverside in 2010.

Successful branding requires commitment, ingenuity, and hard work. As emphasized in a National League of Cities column, “... branding is more than a marketing buzz word of the day. It is more than a tag line or ad campaign. A strong brand is the best of your city. It is a revenue-producing asset. And, trite as it may sound, it is vital to compete and win.”

2010 will be the branding year of Riverside, A City of Arts and Innovation. It is important that we do it right, and well. The Council recently hired Paolucci Communications Arts to take the lead, and prepare the City’s first ever branding campaign. We have come a long way from Happy Side is Riverside! ...

Tracking Cellphone Users Locations

We came across a fascinating -- but also troublesome -- story posted on the PBS Newshour web site. As reported by Lea Winerman, Northeastern University Professor Laszlo Barabasi "analyzed six months of anonymous cell phone records from more than 100,000 people in a European country, obtained from a European cell phone provider. Those cell phone records gave an approximation of each person's location at the time of each call, because cell phone calls are routed through the nearest cell tower. He and his colleagues found that ... nearly half the people rarely strayed outside a six-mile circle. They also tended to go back and forth regularly between only a few locations, such as home and work."

 As Winerman continues: "Those results might not seem surprising, but the researchers say that the model of human motion they developed could be useful for urban planners, evacuation planning and disease tracking. ... Meanwhile, in a lab across town from Barabasi, MIT professor Carlo Ratti is analyzing cell phone data patterns for a slightly different purpose -- he aims to understand patterns of activity at the city scale rather than the individual. In projects in Graz, Austria, Rome and Copenhagen, he and his colleagues have ... [mapped] in real time the shifting patterns of cell phone use throughout the city. ... In Rome, they combined that information with GPS data from city public transportation to capture an ever-changing picture of the city's activity, from traffic jams to nightlife hotspots. The information, Ratti says, could be useful to traffic planners, emergency planners and others."

See the full story, Researchers Mine Cell Phone Data for Insight Into Human Behavior.

In a related report, Cell Phone Data: Can You Track Me Now? (Feb. 19, 2010), NPR's Nell Greenfieldboyce interviewed Professor Barabasi. He told her that: "We were seeing an average of 93 percent predictability across the user base. What does it mean? That means that for the vast majority of the people, you could, in principle, write an algorithm that could predict 93 percent of the time, correctly, their present location."

Greenfieldboyce then drew this interesting follow up comment from Nathan Eagle of the Santa Fe Insitutue: "It's insane. I mean, the vast majority of our species are carrying around a little device that's continually logging their behavior." In fact, USA Today reports that as of the end of 2008, there were an astonishing 4.1 billion cellphone accounts worldwide.

But the ability to track cellphone users has also blossomed into a major legal issue, with serious privacy concerns vying against law enforcement monitoring. See, e.g.

• "Cell Phone Tracking: The New Constitutional Crisis," on Truthout.org (February 24, 2010)
• "Can you hear me now, When privacy matters," Chicago Tribune (February 21, 2010)
• "State stonewalls ACLU on use of cell-phone technology," Barre-Montpelier, Vermont, Times-Argus (March 16, 2010)

Stay tuned. But perhaps turn your cell phone off first!

Valuable Stats on Biking & Walking in U.S.

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville: In yesterday's post, I reported on Reid Ewing's findings on the growing interest in having walkable communities. Today's post is also about walking -- and bicycling.

The Alliance for Biking & Walking, with funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has released a remarkably useful report for anyone interested in bike, pedestrian, public health, and traffic safety issues. Bicycling and Walking in the United States 2010 Benchmarking Report is available to download as a pdf file; you can also separately download the Executive Summary.

The Report is replete with data. In fact, there's an almost overwhelming amount of data, covering a wide range of topics. But what's most important is how well organized and designed the report is -- and how easy-to-read the charts, maps, and graphics are (several are included below with permission of the Alliance). It's a pleasure to come across a document like this.

Some of the information that caught my eye:

"States where bicycling and walking levels are lowest have the highest levels of obesity." Not surprising, but well-documented in the report. As with most of the data, you can see how your state ranks; rankings are also listed for major U.S. cities.

Related to this, "states with the highest levels of bicycling and walking have a greater percentage of the population meeting the recommended 30-plus minutes a day of physical activity."

 

The Report notes that: "Walking and bicycling have great potential to improve public health. In 2001, 41% of trips in the U.S. were shorter than two miles and 28% were shorter than one mile. Since bicycling can accommodate trips of up to two miles and most people can walk at least one mile, there is a lot of hope to use this form of travel in our communities." -- Amen to that.

 "On average, states spend just 1.2% of their federal transportation dollars on bike/ped projects (based on the 5-year funding period from 2004-2008). This amounts to just $1.29 per capita for bicycling and walking each year." Distressing information. -- But, on the bright side, there's lots of room for improvement.

"The number of people who bicycle to work has increased steadily, rising 29.8% between 1990 and 2007 from 466,856 to 664,859 people who bicycle to work nationwide. During the same time period the number of people who walk to work fell 12% despite population growth of 21% (from roughly 249 million people in 1990 to roughly 301 million people in 2007)." Again, room for improvement.

"Cities plan for roughly 60% more miles of bicycle and pedestrian facilities as the amount they currently have." -- Ah, good news!

 "Cities averaged 22.5 bicycle parking spaces per 10,000 people. Minneapolis has the highest amount of bicycle parking per capita with 430.3 bicycle parking spaces per 10,000 people." -- And it can sure get cold in Minneapolis from November through April (see below).

Finally, something we also think about a lot up here in Vermont where the Planning Commissioners Journal is located: does weather influence the choice to bicycle?

"The Alliance compared average summer and winter temperatures to bicycle share of work trips in 50 states and did not find any compelling evidence that weather is a major influence. Montana and Alaska, for example, are among states with the coldest temperatures, yet are also among the states with the highest levels of bicycling." -- While I'm not totally convinced that weather is irrelevant, it's still good to hear that bicyclists are not easy to deter! See a video about winter bike commuters in Chicago.

Again, those are just some of the highlights. Take a look for yourself, I'll bet there's some interesting information you'll find.

Note: graphics from the Report are reposted here with permission of Alliance for Biking & Walking.

The Future Belongs to Walkable Communities

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

"The future belongs to walkable communities," claimed planning scholar Reid Ewing at a forum in Burlington, Vermont, sponsored by the University of Vermont Transportation Research Center and the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission and Metropolitan Planning Organization. 

Ewing, who recently joined the faculty at the University of Utah's City and Metropolitan Planning program, has long focused his research and writing on land use and transportation issues. His career's included stints as Director of the Voorhees Transportation Center at Rutgers University and as a research professor at the National Center for Smart Growth. Interestingly, he's also squeezed in two terms in the Arizona state legislature. 

In his Burlington remarks, Ewing highlighted the benefits of "transit-oriented development" (TOD). But Ewing also argued that "pedestrian-oriented development has more potential nationwide than transit-oriented development." As he explained, outside of larger cities there's just not enough population to support rail-based transit, an essential component to TOD. That's certainly the case in places like Vermont. But pedestrian-oriented development (POD) will work in small and mid-sized communities.

Ewing noted that walking is the second most used mode of transportation after the automobile. In the U.S. today, he said, 86% of all trips are by car, followed by 9% on foot, and only 2% by transit. What's more, when people are surveyed they invariably indicate they would like to be able to walk more. Yet land development patterns and current housing choices, Ewing argued, often put roadblocks in the way of increased walking.

One factor necessary for POD, said Ewing, is density two to three times higher than the roughly 4 dwelling units per acre that is currently the norm in many suburbs. Also critically important is having a diversity of land uses close by. This allows, he noted, a higher proportion of people to walk from their homes to grocery stores, coffee shops, and sometimes, their place of employment. 

Another key factor in PODs or TODs is good design. Among the design principles Ewing pointed to is shorter blocks. "Block size is really important, and the shorter the block, the more walkable a community will be." As density increases it is also essential, he said, to provide ample public spaces, such as parks and plazas, "as a relief so it doesn't feel as crowded."

 Why care whether we have PODs and TODs? To Ewing, the single biggest benefit is that increased walking (or use of transit) reduces car use. This matters because cars run on fossil fuels which emit carbon dioxide which increases global warming (Ewing is co-author of Growing Cooler: The Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change, published by the Urban Land Institute). But walking, Ewing added, also yields health benefits.

Ewing acknowledged that there's no hard data on the percentage of new development that would be considered pedestrian-oriented, though he said a ballpark figure would be between 3 and 5 percent. For Ewing, part of the problem is that "the development industry is still building for an outdated market, one that existed twenty years ago." Ewing does, however, see signs of change, especially in the increased consumer demand "for smaller lot single-family homes."

Two other obstacles cited by Ewing: older land development codes which prohibit the higher densities and smaller lot sizes needed to support PODs or TODs, and "subsidies for automobile use" -- especially through what he said is the over generous supply of parking. On this last point Ewing noted that "the less parking provided the more likely people will walk or use transit."

Mobility Crisis Is No Midnight Hallucination After a Bad Burrito

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 
To read his complete State of the City address 

If I had to name one thing … one top issue that poses the greatest threat to Fort Worth’s ability to compete, I wouldn’t have to think twice about it -- It’s mobility, or the lack there of. This is an extraordinarily complicated and expensive problem ...

The mobility crisis of North Texas is no midnight hallucination after a bad burrito, it’s not a naysayer’s notion, it’s real and it’s costing us dearly. To meet growth expectations over the next two decades, North Texas needs to invest $130 billion in regional transportation system improvements.

That number should be no surprise to anyone who frequents our congested highways. I’ve sat in that traffic more than I’d like to admit. I know how frustrating it is. Some days you can change a tire without losing your place in traffic.

We, and many of you in this room, have been working hard to find answers that offer real relief for commuters. Southwest Parkway continues to move forward steadily. This major artery will greatly improve mobility in southwest Fort Worth and relieve the pressure on I-35, Hulen, Bryant Irvin, and others by the year 2013 ... Widening I-35 between downtown and far north Fort Worth also continues to be a priority. ...

Although all battles are not yet won, we are advancing the front lines.

Commuter Rail, street cars, and other alternative modes of transportation also remain a priority for me and this City Council. Unfortunately, Fort Worth and other major metropolitan areas are finding out the hard way what a mistake it was to design and build cities around automobiles years ago. Friends, we cannot continue to focus solely on building more roads for more vehicles. That’s counter productive at best.

Business as usual is dead!

North Texas requires a transportation overhaul. No more band-aides, no more patches -- a complete overhaul! ...

Frankly, I’m tired of talking about this. This afternoon, workers at BNSF … employees at Lockheed Martin or Bell Textron … even many of you in this room will leave work and then sit … and sit … and sit in traffic. It’s a frustrating daily routine that carries a great cost once you consider the impacts to our quality of life, our environment, our air, and our ability to attract and keep new business investment. 

If this is a mobility crisis -- and I believe it is -- then it must be treated like one!

In the spirit of the early Fort Worth pioneers who took it upon themselves to pick up shovels and extend the first rail line to our city, it’s time that we took matters in our own hands. It is clear to me that we are not going to get where we need to be by relying only on help from the feds or the state.

We are going to have to pull ourselves out of the ditch!

In the coming weeks, I will appoint an 11-member Blue Ribbon Task Force. I will charge this body with returning specific recommendations to the full City Council on how we fix or relieve pressure on Fort Worth’s aging transportation infrastructure. ... Because of the urgency of this matter, I will ask this task force to present recommendations within 90-days of the first meeting. This will allow any proposals to be thoughtfully considered during the next budget cycle. ...

We must take responsible action, and we must do it swiftly!

I submit that further delays are as dangerous as licking a steak knife! Got that visual?

And, let me be absolutely clear: Finding solutions to this mobility crisis ourselves does not relieve the state of its responsibility to deliver our region and our city its fair share of transportation dollars.

---

Editor's note: heard about this State of the City address via George Osner on Twitter.