Regional and Neighborhood Development:Planning the Evolution of Our Suburbs

A Special Presentation to the USGBC Fox Valley Chapter

Mahender VasandaniChairman. Education and Outreach Committee, CNU-Illinois

August 27, 2009

2

What I Will Talk About:

Where Are We Today in Terms of Regional Growth?

What Are the Implications of the “Big Challenges” for Evolution of Suburbs?

Why the Suburbs May Need to Evolve?

Are There Any Preferred Growth Options?

What Can We Learn from the Cities? New Urbanism Offers Some Key Answers

Specific NU Examples Suitable For Suburbs

Overview of Form-Based Codes/A NU Implementation Tool Q & A

3

Far Chicago Suburbs

4

Acknowledgement: Ours Is A Suburban Nation (In A Capitalist Democracy)

From 1950 to 2000: 90% of metropolitan growth in the Suburbs

By 2000: 60% of metro jobs in the Suburbs Suburb-to-Suburb job commutes 2X Suburb-City

commutes

From 1970 to 2000: Total Housing Units Increased 9% Suburban Housing Units Increased Almost 100%

Questions:Is This All Good? All Bad? Or, Are There Pros And Cons?What Are the Implications for Future Regional Growth?

Where Are We Today?

5

Implications for the Future…

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-op-kotkin6-2008jul06,0,1038461.story

Response Depends on One’s Perspective on the Age-Old Debate:

City living is good/better Suburban living is good/better

Living + working in City is the only way forward; More sustainable

Living closer to suburban jobs keeps travel miles low

Multiple transportation modes and route options

Car-dependent travel; limited route options

A mix of uses within walking distance

Single, isolated uses force car travel for all needs

Less car use = Less pollution More car use = More pollution; More congestion

Many suburbs will not survive

Suburban demand will remain strong

The “Leinbergers” The “Kotkins”vs.

6

Implications for the Future…

My view: To survive/thrive in the future:

Suburban regions will need to: Provide for all transportation options: Cars, Trains, Buses, Bicycles and Pedestrian-ways Extend Existing Commuter Service to Outlying Suburbs Start the new Metra “STAR” Line

Suburbs will need to: Allow mixing of uses Allow diversity of housing options/housing types Allow moderately higher densities Allow street connectivity Allow multi-functional streets/boulevards Create compact and walkable neighborhoods Create great places

……Become More Urban (“New Urban”)

7

Why Do the Suburbs Need to Evolve?

I. Economic Challenges: Housing Over-Supply Commercial Oversupply

Implications:Limited/Slow Short-term Growth Potential; Extended Growth

Time-lines

II. Energy Security/Climate-Change Challenges: Over-dependence on high-carbon fossil fuels/GHG Emissions Over-dependence on cars as sole form of mobility

Implications/Policy Questions: ”Re-Order” Growth Patterns?Reduce Total Car Travel?New Mobility Technologies?

III. Community Character Challenge: Little Attention to the Public Realm/Urban Form

Implication:Better Character and Quality of Life Can Provide Key Market

Advantages

8

Climate Change: “Re-Order” Regional Growth Patterns

Recommendations from

the Past and other States:

1. Create Growth Boundaries/

Stop Suburbanization2. Limit Infrastructure

Spending

In Chicago Metro Area:

“Re-ordering” VirtuallyImpossible for Historicaland Political Reasons

Most Strategies and Benefits Possible atLocal Level

LEED-ND2010 2020 20402030“Re-Order” Growth Patterns

Chicago Metro: Over 100 Years of Growth

Source:

9

Climate Change: Reduce Total Vehicle Miles Travelled

2010 2020 20402030 Reduce Total Travel Miles

Typical Recommendations: 1. Reduce Total Miles of Travel, 2. Encourage Higher Density Living3. Encourage Live-Work Units 4. Encourage People to Live Close to Work5. Build TODs 6. Avoid Car Trips

Trip-length shorteningnot as beneficial ascutting down on number of trips

-- Joe Cortright, Impresa Consulting for “CEOs for Cities”

California SB 375 Example

STAR LINE and TODs will cut down on auto trips

By increasing walkability New Urbanism will help achieve Trip Avoidance.

10

Climate Change: New Mobility Technology

2010 2020 20402030 New Mobility Technology

Toyota FCHV in 2015“Shockingly Low Price”

Honda FCXClarity: 2009

New Alternate Zero-Emission Fuels and Alternate Vehicle Technologies*

My Crystal Ball ???!!!

In Another Generation:1. NMT use wide-spread2. Less serious concern with GHG emissions/pollution3. Little change in locational decisions4. More cars on limited capacity roads5. MORE TRAFFIC CONGESTION 6. MORE NEED FOR WALKABLE,

MIXED-USE COMMUNITIES with TRANSIT OPTIONS-Toyota Motors

www.autobloggreen.com July 20, 2009 article

Image source: www.discoveryresources.com

NMT Evolution!

(*”Since VMT are not projected to decreasesignificantly in the near or long-term in the Chicago region, CMAP’s strategies to promotealternative fuels are important to help save energyand mitigate GHG and criteria pollutions” –Volpe Center, U.S. DOT -- October 2008Action Strategy Paper on Climate Change and Energy)

11

Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism

New Urbanism: A 20+ year old Planning and Urban Design DisciplineNU learns from the virtues of existing and past cities.NU helps create: Compact, Connected, Walkable, Diverse Neighborhoods with Mixed-Uses Quality Public Realm and High Quality of Life Distinct Transportation Solutions New Codes and Tools for Implementation

Examples fromCity of Chicago: Neighborhoodsand Boulevards

12

NU Design Principles for Suburban Neighborhoods

Create Inter-connected Street Network Between Neighborhoods Create Neighborhoods with Centers with Mixed-Uses within Walking Distance of Most Residents Locate Neighborhood Centers with Exposure and Access to Major Arterials Allow A Variety of Residential Types Allow Moderately High Densities Focus on Urban Design along with concerns with land-use, transportation, finances and services Help Create Quality Places/Stay competitive in market place Evolve as a Suburban Community…Become More Urban – “New Urban”

13

Adopt not just a tax-revenue-based land-use policy…

Key NU Design Principles

But also an Urban Design Policy...Allow Boulevards with Multiple Transportation Modes, Mixed-Uses and/or Multiple Residential Types (maybe not this dense) along Boulevards

14

Key NU Design Principles

For better traffic circulation and less traffic congestion, avoid/minimize cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets as they promote greater cardependence

Instead, allow well-connected network of streets that may or may not be in rectilinear grids

15

Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism: Example 1

Harbor Town, Memphis, TN:Variety of Residential TypesMixed-UsesConnected NeighborhoodsBoulevard SystemStrong Sense of Place

16

Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism: Example 2

New Town at St. Charles, MO:Innovative Variety of Residential TypesMixed-Use Center/Civic CenterIntegrated/Creative Stormwater SystemHigh-quality Public Realm/Sense of Place

17

Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism: Example 3

Legacy Center, Plano, TexasTown Center on street gridCommercial, Office, Hotel, Restaurants, Townhomes, Condominiums/Apartments Central Civic Space/Sense of Place

18

Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism: Example 4

Addison Circle, Addison, Texas:Close to suburban train stationPrimarily Residential with Townhomes and ApartmentsMajor Open Space Central to PlanModerately High DensityHigh Quality of Space/Strong Sense of Place

19

Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism: Example 5

Southlake Center, Southlake, Texas:Central Civic Space: Foreground to Village HallSurrounded by Mixed-Use Shopping + Offices, Entertainment, Restaurants and TownhomesMajor Innovation from Single-Use Shopping Center (as initially proposed)Highly Successful Community Destination/Community Pride

20

Suburban Evolution with New Urbanism: Example 6

Plano TOD, Texas: New downtown/TOD at a DART stationModerately dense Neighborhoods with Mixed-Use ShoppingEconomic Development/Transit Ridership Increase/Sustainable Model

21

Public Support for Transit

Not Sure: 3%

Maintain/RepairExisting Roads, Highways, Bridges:

50%

Improve Transit:

31%

Expand/Improve Roads:

16% Build New Roads:

20%

Improve Public Transportation:

47%

Build WalkableCommunities:

25%

Not Sure:

8%

Build commuter rail, light rail and subways:

75%

Build highwaysand freeways:

20%

Not Sure: 5%

1

3

2

Survey Questions*:1. Transportation Priorities of Federal Government2. Best Long-Term Solutions to Reduce Congestion3. Transportation Approach to Accommodate Growth

*January 2009 Growth and Transportation Survey by Hart Assoc.As reported in “Common Ground” Summer 2009,Published by National Association of Realtors

22

Federal Legislative Initiatives: Livable Communities Act

The Livable Communities Act will: Create competitive planning grants to create long-term plans Create challenge grants that towns and regions can use to implement these long-term plans Establish a federal Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities at the HUD and oversee the Livable Communities grant programs; Establish a federal Interagency Council on Sustainable Communities to coordinate federal sustainable development policies.

August 6, 2009: Senator Christopher Dodd introduced aLivable Communities Act that will help communities:

Mitigate traffic congestion Reduce greenhouse gas emissions Cut down on fuel consumption Protect open space Build affordable housing Revitalize existing main streets and urban centers

23

New Urbanism Regulations: Form-Based Codes

1. Relatively New Regulation Tool in Illinois

2. Based on A Community Vision

3. Focus is the Public Realm (Form and Quality of the Outside Built Environment)

4. Place-specific to Retain Existing Character

5. Several Urban Standards

6. Graphic/More Comprehensible

7. Predictable Urban Form and Character

8. Different from Conventional Zoning Regulations FBCs more concerned with Urban Form, Less with Use FBCs facilitate mixing of uses Not concerned with F.A.R.s, Densities and Lot Coverages Allow administrative approval of projects

24

Focus on Quality of the Built Environment for Public Realm

Project Credit: Dover Kohl & Partners

Public realminfluenced by thearchitecture ofbuildings;the proportions of thesize of public placesto building heightsand the amenities in the public places

Form-Based Codes/Regulations

25

Predictable Placement and Bulk of Buildings

• PREDICTABILITY of massing and bulk of future projects

• Less public concern about bulk and other impacts

• Potential benefit: Streamlined project review process

• Good for developers too

Form-Based Codes/Regulations

Project Credit: Dover Kohl & Partners

26

Form-Based Codes/Regulations

An Integrated Code with Standards for: Thoroughfares, Frontages, Building Types, Public Spaces, Landscaping – All Linked to a Regulating Plan

Typically Easier to Comprehend and Administer

27

Form-Based Codes/Regulations

Conventional/Euclidian FBCs Based on Abstract Land Use and Zoning Categories

Segregated/Isolated Uses

Proscribes (What Is Not Allowed)

Unpredictable Building Bulk/Form (F.A.R.s and Densities by Lot Size)

Unpredictable Character

Rarely Any Sense of Place

Based on Adopted Community Vision

Mixed Uses

Prescribe (What Is Desirable)

Predictable Building/Urban Form (Bulk Limits regardless of Lot Size )

Vision of Built Form Predetermined based on Site Development Capacity Analyses (Max. Heights, Bulk); Retain existing or create new character

Power of Place

28

Closing Remarks

Future of Suburbs: Assumed to Evolve Given Economic, Energy and Climate Challenges Evolution Will be Essential for Survival/Revival/”Thrival”

New Urbanism Offers Key Answers for Suburban Evolution NU Design Principles Should be Part of a Suburban Community’s Policy Quality Places and Quality of Life Will be Market Advantages

Form-Based Codes/Regulations Provide an Effective Tool to Create Mixed-Use Centers and Achieve Community Vision

29

Thank You!

Mahender VasandaniChairman, Education and Outreach CommitteeCNU-Illinois

PresidentM Square | Urban DesignPhone: 630.845.1202Email: mgv@msqre.com