South End Moving Up

In Charlotte, TOD has been sprouting like weeds. It must make the faux libertarians mad that their pet cause isn't getting all the money, and doesn't produce the changes that everyone else wants. Today there was an article in the Observer documenting the growth in the south end of Charlotte:

"There has been an increased interest in South End within the last two years," said Tim Manes, planning coordinator with the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Commission. "We are starting to see more projects in the preliminary design stage, rezoning stage and even formal transit-oriented development approval stage.

"Light rail is definitely one of the major draws for new projects, said Ryan Willis, principal for Boxwood, a realty company that represents the new Park Avenue Plaza project and also has a project in the NoDa arts district north of uptown.Park Avenue Plaza, a four-story condominium building under construction on Park Avenue, will have 39 residential units built around a boutique hotel-style atrium.

It also will have four commercial spaces at street level and a parking garage.The developer was initially interested in that site because CATS planned a light rail stop at Park Avenue, though that stop was eventually deleted from plans, Willis said. There's still a stop at Bland Street, though, about 500 feet north of the property, he said.

And I guess its a bit of a competition between two parts of town.

"In the past two years, what I've seen is that the South End is growing faster than the NoDa area," he said. "It's almost like they're competing for the title of the arts area."

Both NoDa and South End have monthly gallery crawls. Other galleries in the South End include the Charlotte Art League, Elder Gallery, Chasen Galleries, and Hidell Brooks Gallery.

Newell doesn't see the comparison between NoDa and South End. Merrifield Partners markets toward engineers, architects and designers who want to live and work in the same area. NoDa tends to draw artists.

"It's a whole different animal than NoDa. It's just a different market. It's different buildings, more amenities, better transit," he said. "A lot of those things contribute to South End."

That's right, better transit and better access means more development and higher land values. I sure wish they would have built a freeway on that rail line. Instead of an 11 story building, we could have 11 one story buildings. Wouldn't that be swell.

Land Use, Land Use, Land Use

We've known for a while now that it isn't just the transportation that matters, it's also the land use it serves. And new research from Smart Growth America is another rather compelling argument for it. It basically states that compact development is key to reducing auto dependence and the effects of climate change. This report also uses the expertise of Jerry Walters at Fehr & Peers who with his colleagues there has come up with the direct ridership model which does a better job at predicting ridership based on different access to the stations such as bikes, buses, and walking based on the land uses and the surrounding grid. Previous studies referenced in this report state that there is a 35% reduction in driving from compact development.

The 1994 Portland Metro Travel Survey stated that people who live in mixed use communities with good transit take about 9.8 VMT per capita versus 21.7 VMT per capita. That's rather impressive and shows that increases in transportation and land use measures would benefit cities who are looking to reduce VMT. This finding was used to show that the over 7,000 housing units built on the streetcar line downtown in walkable, transit oriented neighborhoods, would reduce VMT by 31 million a year. If we say that a gallon of gas is 20 pounds of carbon, then we would reduce carbon emissions by 24.8 million pounds if fuel economy is 25 mpg which is being really generous.

More transit options, more compact development, reduced VMT.

Talking TOD With Peter Calthorpe

Peter Calthorpe is sort of seen as the godfather of modern TOD. His 1992 book, the Next American Metropolis written with Shelley Poticha was the first real guidebook on how TOD should work after data on density was collected by Jeff Zupan and Boris Pushkarev of the RPA in 1977.

Here's a little of what he has to say in a podcast interview with Reconnecting America:

It’s interesting to me that in the age of the streetcar, you had low-density streetcar suburbs that worked just fine. I think that that kind of lifestyle can work, where you can get even moderate densities to be very effective in supporting transit systems. I don’t think we have to correlate high density apartment living with TODs, I think there can be townhouse neighborhoods and even small lot, single-family neighborhoods with transit systems. Once again, it’s the mix.

I think that's a really important point. TOD doesn't need to be super dense everywhere to be effective. There is a general fear out there that planners are trying to change neighborhoods into 100 unit per acre condo towers. But that is simply not bearable in the Market.

Anyways, check out the interview.

Building a System: Portland's Legacy

In 1986 Portland began light rail operation. The line was built instead of a freeway which would have ripped through neighborhoods and allowed for the sprawling monster to continue. However, today we see the fruits of Portland's labor and the results of what the construction of a transit network can do for a community.

21 years ago nothing was certain. However, the Portland region banded together to decide on their future. In 1986 Portland Tri-Met had 162,500 average weekday boardings, 19,600 on rail and the rest on bus. Fast forward to 2006, we see that 307,200 rides with 99,000 of those rides coming from rail. The May ridership for Portland was 110,000 average weekday boardings. What is important is that this rail push has saved gobs of cash. With a 72 cent required boost from Tri-Met versus a $1.92 for bus, you can see why the investment has paid off. 23% of Portland's operating cost is for rail yet rail makes up 32% of the ridership.

The vision of the original Lutraq plan and the network of rail lines and city centers is being quietly implemented all the time. Expected next week is an FFGA from the federal government for the I-205 Light Rail Line. Planning is underway for the Streetcar to Lake Oswego and Milwaukie Max. This plan shows that when cities put their will and collective mind into doing something it can get done. The expansion of Portland's system can be replicated but it takes time and planning. Hopefully more cities will wake up and realize the cost savings as well as quality of life improvements brought by this way of doing things.

A Huge TOD

Pentagon City is about to get a huge TOD. 3,200 Units is a lot so it might take a while to build. But this will give a huge ridership boost to the two metro lines.

Kettler, one of the Washington area’s leading diversified real estate development and property management companies, announced today that it has purchased 19.6 acres in Pentagon City from affiliates of Vornado Realty Trust for approximately $220.4 million. Kettler closed on the initial 11 acres today for $104.3 million, and plans to purchase the remaining acreage over the next year.

Or Regular Property Owner

Apparently they still have to pay taxes.

Houston Metro: Property Owner

I'm not sure what i think of this move by Metro to buy a developer's land then sell back when they are ready. I'm guessing this is to give the developer time to come up with a TOD plan without incurring the costs of holding land year to year. Perhaps the city should have come up with a way to do this without having Metro purchase the land and make it available for all properties that are going to develop TOD. In that sense they would be able to provide more density and community benefits with the money they saved. Heck perhaps this is a way to fund new light rail lines? Buy the land along a corridor and sell it back to pay for the infrastructure. It could work right? It would be a LIF. Land Increment Financing.

What We Should Really Learn From Curitiba

The Candyland blog reminded me why Curitiba has been able to do what people go down there to see. What they see is shiny red buses as a low cost option to real rapid transit. That's also what they bring back to the United States after the trip shows them how great the buses are. But there is a bigger lesson they aren't learning from Curitiba. Starting in 1964 with a military coup, they radically planned for growth management of their city. This included intensive land use planning and a similar idea to our smart growth movement for curbing sprawl. Jamie Lerner, the mastermind behind Curitiba's revitalization was essentially the Brazilian Jane Jacobs and the ideas behind Curitiba would make road warriors and libertarians sulk.

(translated from Portuguese) the managing idea of the project was the creation of a composed infrastructure for a zone of great concentration of activities and of raised habitational density. The concentration of the urban activities had as purpose to revitalize(sic) “the street”, considering it with a primordial function of the life of the community. The proposals for the Structural Axles of Curitiba keep some similarities with this project.

This project in France of Jaime Lerner would show up in Curitiba as the corridors project. In keeping with the allowance of densification in downtown, there needed to be a new place to grow. It would be decided that this would occur on corridors and tie the transport together with the land use.

The same attitude demonstrated in these projects of architecture, with emphasis in the distribution of spaces and its relations with the structure and infrastructure of the buildings, if transposed for urbanism, in the interrelation between zoning and system of collective transport....The main quarrel of the Preliminary Plan was which proposal of growth would have to be adjusted for the future of Curitiba. The idea of city delimited for a green cinturão, seemed impracticable ahead of the possibility of a indeterminate growth. The orientation of development from linear axles, in contraposition to the concentrical city of the Agache Plan, seemed most adequate

Given the ability of cities to extend indefinitely, the corridor system would address this issue allowing corridors to grow up while not sprawling. In 1971 Jaime Lerner became mayor of the city. Trained as an architect and with the help of a dictatorship, he was able to impose his vision on the people for better or worse. After over 40 years of planning, Curitiba is what it is, it's what would happen if an architect and smart growther took over a city. But folks should not come back from that city just thinking, "what a cheap bus, lets do it here". They should be repeating the three premises of the Curitiba plan: use of the ground, collective transport and circulation. And in the United States, you might as well build rail, because that is what developers write checks for and building a busway to Curitiba standards costs the same as rail.

Misconceptions of Smart Growth, New Urbanism and TOD

I would consider myself a New Urbanist and a Smart Growth advocate but I'm not sure that i would characterize it as wanting people to live on top of each other or even communism as some have so put it. Just like with rail transit versus the automobile, people like to have choices. And given that the vast majority of new construction are single family homes, this doesn't match up with consumer choices. The reason we know this is because this condo boom is always reviled as a rich boom. There is a huge demand and people will pay premiums to live in urban settings over suburban ones. Building neighborhoods is something that was forgotten between the era of streetcar suburbs and today.

What the New Urbanists are trying to do is bring that neighborhood structure back. You might hate the modernest architecture and the silly color schemes but that isn't what New Urbanism is all about (although its a hot type right now and all builders will want to claim new urbanism in their projects). A lot of projects are on greenfields where people have their own yards and the ability to walk in their neighborhood with interconnected streets and connections to transit. The projects you hear about are the infill projects where developers are fighting to make building density and mixed use legal again since it has been outlawed in many cities by post war zoning codes. That causes quite a rile in newspapers and media but doesn't tell the larger story of the movement.

In New Urbanism there is a strategy for design called the transect. It talks about the densities that should be employed from center city to the rural. You'll rarely see anything but single family homes in the T1 or T2 settings(The transect goes from T1 which is the most rural to the T6 which is New York City type density). So while many might think that New Urbanists and Smart Growth types are all about shoving density down your throats, its really all a misconception of how the movement operates and how it values neighborhood design that goes back to the streetcar suburbs that had grid street patterns and good transit options. If more people had the choice of walking, biking or taking transit we would have less of an issue with peak oil or oil at all.