neat urban planning stuff

All valid points. I guess I would agree with you that the barring the Tiebout hypothesis this is a pretty wacky and exclusionary (or at least could be) policy to pursue. Yeah, it is weird about Portland's lack of density. It is one of the least dense cities in the U.S., which kind of flies in the face of the whole purpose ostensibly underlying implementation of the UGB. However, I have heard that although people "nowadays" think that the UGB's ostensible purpose is a compact urban setting, such a result is only incidental to the real motive prompting enactment of the UGB scenario: the states billion dollar farming industry. so although it seems like the UGB may have stopped growth altogether, instead of just channeling it to denser forms, perhaps it should really be evaluated in light of the actual farmland it has preserved? I don't know.
 
I don't know enough about the Portland UBG history, but it may well be that it was to motly to protect the agriculture industry. I know it was a factor, and I'm sure one that won some votes in what was then a conservative and more rural state. I'm trying to find it but can't ... I know there was some scholarly research about the UGB in Seoul, and how it accommodated growth by channeling it into the core very effectively ...
 
I'm by no means an expert on UGBs or the Portland case either. I have heard, though, that it was motivated in Or by the billion dollar farming industry. urbanization is only one goal of many in the state plan that enables the UGB growth management control, but it has turned out to be perhaps the most important and controversial.
 
I didn't have time to read it all, but I always thought Atlanta was the exception to major U.S. cities in that it had a large dominant and thriving black middle and upper class. When we stopped in Atlanta at the airport, the impression I got was of black guys in three piece suits on cell phones--i.e., corporate America. He has some good points about the fortification of towers, though, but isn't that old news? People have been criticizing structures like this for fifty years. And correct me if I am wrong, but new urbanism started in the early 1980s, about 20 years prior to when the author of that blog post suggests things really started to get going (at least ten years ago, he said). I think that may have been when it really started to take hold as a term of pop culture or as a household name, but DPZ has been advocating for this stuff for years. An excellent point, though, made by the author, is that these little fake towns based on new urbanist ideals ARE islands sometimes, and in that sense are no different from cul de sac subdivisions that leapfrog across a sprawling exurban landscape. To be successful, new urbanism needs to be combined with principles of smart growth, that is, new urbanist developments, in my opinion, will be optimally achieved where implemented in pre-existing town centers, near pre-existing services and infrastructure, and integrated into a larger whole rather than starting from scratch. Thanks for sharing this post.
 
For anyone interested:

Transportation Planner
Boston Transportation Department
Location:
Boston, Massachusetts, 02201, United States
Posted on:
June 1, 2010
Category:
Transportation
Experience:
Not specified

BOSTON TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT HIRING PLANNER

The Boston Transportation Department is currently seeking an enthusiastic and highly motivated City Planner to work on projects that will realize the City?s vision to create streets and public spaces that are vibrant, multi-modal, sustainable and technologically advanced. The selected candidate will report directly to the Director of Policy and Planning.

TASKS INCLUDE:

- Manage major corridor design and streetscape improvement projects from concept to design. This includes preparation of RFP?s, managing consultant teams, inter-agency coordination, and leading the community process.

- Participate as a core member of the City of Boston Complete Streets Initiative ? a process to devise new design standards for Boston?s streets and sidewalks. This includes assisting in the design of projects to expand the city?s growing bicycle network.

- Review large-scale development projects for transportation impacts, working directly with developers to devise appropriate mitigation items.

- Develop innovative parking policies to reduce congestion and promote the use of alternative modes.

- Collaborate with local universities, non-profits, and private strategists to create policies that encourage the use of technology in the City?s infrastructure, including support for hybrid/electric vehicles.

- Research case studies from other cities, and devise recommendations for transportation policy initiatives in the form of memos and presentation materials.

DESIRED SKILLS:

- Ability to collaborate with a diverse range of City agencies, private consultants, and community groups
- Proven research, writing, oral, and graphic presentation skills
- Enthusiasm and passion for transportation and urban design
- Flexibility to handle multiple ongoing projects while envisioning new, cutting-edge initiatives

Strong preference will be given to candidates with a Masters degree in city planning and/or urban design, computer skills including GIS mapping and Adobe Creative Suite and a demonstrated ability to take projects from concept to implementation. For details please contact Vineet Gupta, Director of Policy and Planning at (617) 293-3045 or at vineet.gupta@cityofboston.gov

Boston Residency Required.
 
Livable Communities Act

Courtesy of the Houston Tomorrow newsletter, here is a report on the proposed Livable Communities Act. Senate Bill Connects Transportation, Land Use Planning: Livable Communities Act. Quoting the D.C. Streetsblog:

The Livable Communities Act would provide about $4 billion in competitive grants to coordinate housing, transportation, and economic development policy with an eye toward promoting sustainable development. About $400 million would be slated for planning with the remainder funding implementation. The bill would also create a new office within the Department of Housing and Urban Development to guide and administer the programs. If passed, it would strengthen the Obama administration?s multi-agency Sustainable Communities Initiative.

Sounds great in its intent, though short on specifics, as most proposed legislation is. Senator Dodd opines:

Senator Dodd described the bill at the hearing, stressing that ?integrated transportation and land use planning can help address a host of challenges: high foreclosure rates, climate change and oil dependency, deteriorating infrastructure, traffic congestion, and the loss of farmland. ?

I have a couple of questions, though. First, to the extent that this bill can be construed to represent the Obama administration's commitment to rethinking urban development and land use, and promoting transit oriented development and sustainable communities, how does it square with the other administration policies that seem determined to continue promoting single-family home ownership in suburban sprawl?

Second, I'm not persuaded by this last exchange on performance measures:

Senator Warner supports the bill, but would like to see the Livable Communities Act have performance measures in place. He asked, ?Is it just squishy livability? Is there a way that we can define this with metrics??

He was assured by responses saying that many of its results can be measured, such as ?the volume of reduced greenhouse gases, acres of preserved open space and rises in property values,? the article reports.

I'm skeptical of "performance measures" and "metrics" generally. More substantively, I think that the point of legislation such as this--agree or disagree with it on the merits--should be to promote quantitatively different community development (which is a quintessentially local issue) and not to be wrapped up in larger transnational issues like global warming. Really, should the "metric" for whether a "Livable Communites" grant is successful be its infinitesimal contribution to reducing the Globe's carbon footprint? There are better ways to fight climate change. I for one would rather promote "squishy livability" than to try to shoehorn some "metric" for carbon reduction into the analysis of whether we should subsidize certain forms of development. If the legislation promotes good development, then that is the primary outcome that should be measured.

Matt Festa



June 23, 2010 in Clean Energy, Climate, Environmental Law, Environmentalism, Federal Government, Property, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
"No New Houses, For You!"

One of the iconic characters created by the much-missed Seinfeld series was the Soup Nazi and his signature "No Soup for You!" rants at George and Elaine.

Well, the housing market just suffered its own version of that rant today as new home sales tanked over 30%. This is a really bad number. Bad enough to provoke talk about a double dip recession all over the web.

Read more from the Calculated Risk blog here.

All of this new housing carnage has a slight silver lining though as it leads me back to the premise that, these days--more than ever--municipalities have the leverage over developers to amend their land use regulations into more sustainable approaches. In the past, developers might have threatened to go build in the next town down the road if anything but the most minimal moves toward sustainable development regs were put in place.

Now where is that developer (if they're even still in business) going to threaten to go? The answer is nowhere because they cannot get the capital to build in the first place.

If cities are serious about reforming their land use codes to embrace sustainable regulations, now is the time to do so as the influence of sprawl-friendly developers is lower than ever.

Professor Chad Emerson of Faulkner University (law school)
 
As a planning student myself, I think this article is fascinating as it raised some very central questions to the art/process of shaping cities and places. I would be curious to hear what others think.

http://www.planetizen.com/node/45549

On the one hand, planning shouldn't be all about process, because then in essence it is a lack of planning and has become replaced by the role of steward. But on the other hand, history tells us that if planners take on too much of the role of an expert technician, things don't always work out right. I think visualization techniques have a place in planning, and it is one of the things that draws me to the profession so much (the ability to envision and take steps toward achieving a certain physical form at a municipal level), but at the same time, as a professor of mine said, front porches and sidewalks don't cure all urban problems. Any thoughts on where the profession should come down between physical planning experts and facilitating procedures as planning stewards? perhaps there should be one group focused on physical planning, and another focused on social issues?
 
^ what's the scoop on this from a new yorker's perspective? Seems like this neighborhood in particular is always the subject of fierce opposition to skyrises. Penn Central was supposed build a 50 to 80 story building on top of the Grand Central Station site that was prevented due to historic district status (this resulted in the famous Penn Central legal case on property rights as pertain to unfair "Takings," for anyone interested). Not too familiar at all with NYC myself, but I know it seems like the most opposition tends to happen around this area.
 
The basic problem is that the city promotes mediocrity. Jean Nouvel proposed a work of art but it was hacked down 200ft for no good reason. This comes up and the city goes out of its way to allow it to be built. You guys may complain about the blank wall on 45 Province St or the bland box of Seaport Sq but you don't know how lucky you are to just have those two; the shit that has gone up in NYC over the last decade has been for the most part ranging from bad to outright offensive.
 
Proposed concept for D.C. Wal-Mart:
149820_654275938680_6903714_37956986_6813825_n.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top