sign in sign up
<<
Home , Jane Jacobs

Walters_03.qxd 2/26/04 7:15 PM Page 66

DESIGN FIRST: DESIGN-BASED FOR COMMUNITIES

Kevin Lynch, and Jane Jacobs during the early 1960s. We have to do better, and to the three central Lynch’s seminal work Image of the (1960) intro- criteria noted earlier we would add an important duced the powerful idea of making the city ‘legible’ fourth: the ways that new developments are gener- to the user through the coding and manipulation of ated and regulated should involve citizens and stake- simplified urban elements such as districts, paths, holders in an open democratic forum. Not only edges, nodes and landmarks. Jacobs, in her powerful should urban public spaces be democratically open in indictment of modernist city planning, The Death their use; the ways they are produced should also be and Life of American (1962), specifically democratically transparent. But this public debate reminded architects of the importance of the in does not necessarily mean ‘consensus.’ Too often a city life, though the message fell on deaf ears for at search for consensus means agreeing around the least another decade. The same points were repeated lowest common denominator, the most minimal set in Britain in 1973 by Nicholas Taylor in his book The of concepts that offend the least number of people. Village in the City, where he argued for the return to Time and again we have seen this process strip away traditional patterns of public and private space, front all the best features of a proposal, until the scheme and back gardens, porches and as the necessary that’s finally agreed upon is an empty shell, even a armature of community life (Taylor, 1973). travesty of its original content and format. It is not consensus that’s important; the crucial factor is a con- centrated, open debate, to provide a fair and equal NEW AND opportunity for concerned citizens to state their points of view. In this way officials who have to take The three strands of that we have the tough decisions are fully informed, and they described earlier, Traditional Neighborhood Develop- know that different opinions have been aired during ment, Transit-oriented Development and design for the design process. rural conservation, weave an agenda for more sustain- This open process can be difficult, but the tempta- able patterns of development that is virtually synony- tion to avoid this forum and to design developments mous with Smart Growth. Planners, local government behind closed doors away from the inconvenience officials, citizens and an increasing number of devel- and messiness of public scrutiny leads to equally opers have shown great interest in New Urbanist severe problems. The attitude that ‘the professionals design, particularly in areas that are experiencing know best’ was invalidated by the errors architects growth-related conflicts. Many see New Urbanism as and planners made during the modernist period of city an approach that enables a community’s growth to be building. To these mistakes we would add the very channeled into a physical form that is more compati- poor quality of private sector developments where ble with the scale of existing neighborhoods, discour- architects and planners were minimally involved. ages excessive auto use, is less costly to service, and Clearly, designers, planners and developers can all uses less land and natural resources. These attributes benefit from citizen involvement in creating their provide a pretty good description of Smart Growth, visions, however complicated and messy this process and although many definitions of Smart Growth exist might be. In the case studies we discuss these issues in in America from organizations like the Smart Growth more detail, and examine how concentrated urban Network, the National Resources Defense Council, design charrettes can provide the best opportunities for the Sierra Club and the Urban Land Institute, to name mediating conflicts and educating a community about only a few, there is common agreement around a basic its future options. set of principles. Many citizens’ groups are vocal in their opinions, Smart Growth means developing in ways that are and they have every right to demand the opportunity environmentally responsible, economically viable, to speak about their ideas. But just because they’re and well designed. A reasonable expectation, you vocal doesn’t mean they’re right; many Smart Growth might agree. But as we’ve seen, most suburban devel- initiatives have been squashed by wrongheaded local opment in America over the last few decades fails opposition. Sometimes Smart Growth policies are these basic tests. Disused strip centers degrade the enacted by government over the objections of local environment, suburban subdivisions cost more tax pressure groups, a process that requires considerable dollars to service that are recouped in property taxes, courage by elected representatives. It also means they, and an awful lot of suburbia is poorly laid out and and their constituents, need to distinguish between shoddily built. myths and facts about Smart Growth. Indeed, much

66 Walters_03.qxd 2/26/04 7:15 PM Page 67

CHAPTER THREE ● TRADITIONAL URBANISM

opposition to Smart Growth arises from misconcep- Planning strategies tions and misunderstandings about the relevant 6. Integrate and issues, and it is worth reviewing the basic principles to minimize the number of trips by car and the and some of the most common errors before we go distances driven. Provide a range of transporta- any further. tion choices to mitigate congestion. Not quite an error, but an important clarification 7. Create a range of opportuni- concerns the similarities and differences between ties and choices. Smart Growth and ‘’. These 8. Preserve open space around and within the com- terms are often used interchangeably, and we, the munity, as working farmland, areas of natural authors, are guilty of that on occasion. There is much beauty or areas with fragile environments. overlap between the two concepts, and all physical 9. Maximize the capacity of existing infrastructure design concepts that constitute Smart Growth sup- by reusing derelict urban sites and filling in gaps port sustainable development. However, the adjective in the urban fabric. Preserve historic buildings ‘sustainable’ adds a deeper dimension (Porter, 2000: and neighborhoods and convert older buildings p. 2). It implies a profound respect for long-term to new uses wherever possible. conservation of natural resources, energy conscious 10. Foster a distinctive sense of place as a building (green) building design and the enhancement of a block of community development. community’s human capital, raising important issues of social justice and equity. Appendix II sets out our set of Smart Growth principles dealing primarily concepts with the physical design of communities, and adds a 11. Create compact, walkable neighborhoods with note or two (in italics) where sustainable develop- connected streets, sidewalks and street trees to ment extends and deepens these concepts. Here we make walking to work, to school, to the bus stop summarize some of the most important points under or train station, or just walking for pleasure the headings of General Policies, Planning Strategies, and exercise, safe, convenient and attractive. and Urban Design Concepts. Integrate offices and shops, along with commu- nity facilities such as schools, churches, libraries, parks, and playgrounds into neighborhoods to General policies create places to walk to and reduce vehicle trips. Design for densities that can support active neigh- 1. Plan collaboratively amongst municipalities within borhood life. (The Denver Regional Air Quality a . Council estimated that urban designs that follow 2. Target public investment to support develop- these guidelines can reduce the Vehicle Miles ment in key areas and to discourage develop- Travelled (VMT) by as much as 10 percent ment in others. Extend suburban areas only in (Allen, p. 16)). locations where they can be supported by exist- 12. Make public spaces the focus of building orien- ing public facilities and services, or by simple tation and neighborhood activity. Move large car and economic extensions of these services. parks away from streets and screen them with 3. Reinforce the centers of cities, towns and neigh- buildings. borhoods. Locate regional attractions in city centers wherever possible, not in suburban To all of which we would add: locations. 13. Think three-dimensionally! Envision your com- 4. Make development decisions predictable, fair, munity in urban design detail. and cost effective. Involve community stake- holders and citizens in the decision-making The concepts embodied in this list will be elaborated process. Require decisions to follow the and exemplified in the Case Study section later in adopted plan. this book, but as noted earlier, it is important to sep- 5. Provide incentives and remove some legisla- arate myths about Smart Growth from the facts. tive barriers to persuade and enable developers Sometimes these myths are the result of honest mis- to do the right thing. Make it easy to build understandings; othertimes they are created by delib- smart developments and harder to build erate exaggeration and distortion of the facts by sprawl. opponents of Smart Growth (of which, more later).

67