|
  he term "livable
communities" describes a national trend of urban planners
to stop designing neighborhoods for automobiles and make them
more people-friendly. As Peter Katz, a leading proponent of urbanist
reform points out, "we've been building great houses but
lousy communities."
 This
national movement is known by many names. For instance, Portland,
Oregon, refers to its approach as "smart growth." In
Florida, it's known as "the new urbanism." In Davis,
California, Michael Corbett's "village homes" community
is described as that area's most desirable neighborhood. In the
New England area, planner Randall Arendt of the Natural Lands
Trust has received wide acclaim for his "conservation subdivision"
approach.
There are
also other terms used to describe the movement, such as "sustainable
development," "healthy neighborhoods," "Main
Street USA" and "organic development" (drawing
from Frank Lloyd Wright's organic architecture approach). Though
the terms are different, they all describe the same approach
-- narrow, tree-lined streets, pedestrian safety, open spaces
and enhancements to foster community activities. As Arendt points
out, these newer communities are better because they use land
efficiently, allowing for the most open space and providing for
social interaction.
Like the ancient
messenger who gets executed by the Chinese emperor for bringing
bad news, developers usually get the blame for the predicament
we are in. Where the problem lies, however, is with the outdated,
automobile-oriented standards we have been using for the past
thirty years. Planners have pointed out the following problems
with these outdated standards:
- We have streets that are far too wide and
straight. Consequently drivers are speeding through residential
neighborhoods.
- Developers are required to construct continuous
parking along both sides of the roadways, giving homeowners a
disincentive to put their cars in the garage and making it more
difficult for drivers to see children at play.
- Sidewalks are constructed adjacent to the
curb so that drivers can easily exit their parked car, but this
places pedestrians closer to the speeding vehicles.
- Street trees are aggressively being removed
to avoid potential liability, even though studies show that they
have a "traffic calming" effect, mitigate urban runoff
and increase property values.
- Developments that cluster to preserve natural
open spaces are discouraged by agencies that require expensive
and time-consuming special permits and hearings.
All
of the country's successful livable communities had to first
convince governing agencies that development criteria needs to
be changed "from the bottom up" by amending outdated
standards. Wallace Tucker, chairman of the San Diego Land Conservancy
Coalition has ingeniously labeled this "smart design."
We've done
such a bad job of community design that everyone has become a
planner and has an opinion on how to correct this complex process.
Unfortunately, most focus on the Portland approach, and only
that portion that relates to downzoning rural lands. What people
fail to realize is that Portland has also significantly changed
its urban development standards with programs encouraging skinny
streets, community open space and riding and hiking trails.
Without changing
development standards, we will continue to churn up land for
development at a rate of consumption per resident unprecedented
in human history. When housing shortages occur, lands outside
the urban limits will be acquired at bargain basement prices,
rezoned, then developed in the same manner.
To provide
workable solutions, the Center for Livable Communities was established
in Sacramento to help local governments and community leaders
be proactive in adopting ordinances and policies that lead to
more livable and resource-efficient land uses. They point to
studies done by Rutgers University, showing that fifty percent
of Americans want to live in village-style neighborhoods.
The Center
also cites an extensive marketing study done by Walt Disney Corporation
before it built its successful "new town" in Celebration,
Florida. They found that one out of every two Americans wanted
to live in a village-style or traditional neighborhood, whereas
less than one percent of new developments meet these criteria.
So by using
"smart design" concepts, we truly can achieve a win-win
situation. Developers can achieve allowable densities with reduced
development costs, clustering will allow for open space dedication
of sensitive areas at no cost to the public, cities have reduced
maintenance costs due to efficiently designed infrastructure,
and we can provide home buyers the types of communities they
most prefer to live in.
There is a
sense of urgency in changing these standards since it is estimated
that, of the 400,000 units that are needed to accommodate our
growth over the next 20 years, over half are on the drawing boards
today. Before significant investment in design studies are done
on these projects, we should at least allow developers the choice
of using livable design concepts.
Groups like
the Citizens for the Preservation of "Olde" Carlsbad
and Fallbrook's Rural Coalition support "smart design"
concepts and are starting to make progress in changing outdated
standards. If you or your organization is interested in finding
more about these programs, email me and I will put you on a mailing
list of various resources.
Let's all
help to "Bring Back the Neighborhood." 
|
cs.com.