Sprawled Out: The Search for Community in the American Suburb

Bikes! Damn bikes!

Sunday's Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel editorial by Patrick McIlheran kicks off with a sage observation regarding the average driver's attitude toward anyone traveling via non-motorized conveyance:

There are times when road policy is a temptation to sin. Try W. Center St., for instance.

Like a lot of old main streets in Milwaukee, Center now has a marked bike lane. You can cross the stripe if there's no bike coming and you're going to park or enter a driveway.

But if it's just you, an empty bike lane, a curbside stretch with no parking and there's an overcautious left-turning Buick in front of you waiting for the oncoming traffic to clear . . . no, you can't ease around on the right. Not if there's a white stripe marking the bike lane. State law says so.

Have you ever done it anyway? By what I see, a lot of Milwaukee drivers have had their fill of interminably halting every two blocks in rush hour. Stripe? What stripe?

Not to lack sympathy for the needs of bicyclists, but the city's lane for them may be trying the souls of drivers, to whom we must say: Leave earlier, be patient, share the road.

Then a transition (and genuflection) to the glorious city-bisecting (trisecting?) freeway, blessed by Saint Zeidler:

Or take a freeway, which isn't a sinful temptation, either. In Milwaukee, one of the progressives' heroic myths is how an uprising of the people stopped the pavers before their superhighways could plow under half the city and drain the life from the rest. Its premise is that freeways are an imposition on the city for the benefit of suburbanites, a kind of secular sin that ruined a pre-automotive Eden.

A new book aims to clear up some of that moralizing. In "Mayor Frank P. Zeidler: Transportation Development in Post-War Milwaukee," James J. Casey Jr. makes the point that our freeways were planned and begun under the mayor who is accorded something close to sainthood by Milwaukee urbanists. What's more, says Casey, Zeidler never regretted building them.

"The common perception of Frank as being anti-freeway isn't borne out by the policies he carried out and by the beliefs he held until he died," says Casey.

The book in question, by the way, is published by the American Public Works Association. Yes, the people who build and service highways and freeways (other available titles include Snow Removal Techniques - Plowing Tips from the Pros, and Ready, Set, Plow! Tips and Tricks for Preparing Your Fleet for Snow Season).

I have no doubt that the Frank Zeidler who helped approve the highway plan in 1952 did so because he saw a way to move people and goods efficiently (and this is not to mention the enormous federal grants and subsidies hanging low from the trees for freeway projects - - lost if not used). I also know that 21st century Frank Zeidler would balk at the knee-jerk asphalt-spreading being proposed today.

Approving of the basic freeway system is not equivalent to condoning continued unchecked  gold-plating of asphalt at the direct expense of creating and maintaining desirable, affordable transit systems and walkable/bikeable communities (including bike paths that don't inconvenience drivers). I don't think the American Public Works Association can claim Zeidler as a "teammate."

Link: JS Online: City's practical partisan never regretted freeways:.

Post 100: The story thus far ...

Back in June I became inspired to start the Sprawled Out blog as my community of Franklin, Wisconsin celebrated an announcement by Northwestern Mutual; they would be doubling the size of their campus on 27th Street. This, coupled with the planned Wheaton Franciscan Healthcare Center on the same street, created euphoria among the city's administration and planners. (My district's alderman, Alan Hammelman, even went so far as to write a letter to the community paper expressing surprise at the lack of enthusiasm he perceived among his fellow Franklinites over these developments.)

As I explained in my first post, it looked to me like Franklin was on the very cusp of some fairly momentous decisions related to how 27th Street’s development is addressed. Adding to nest of tangles ahead is the fact that 27th Street acts as the border between Franklin and its neighbor community, Oak Creek. What a tremendous opportunity to observe local and regional planning - - and hopefully, cooperation - -  in action.

I decided to use my community as an example of the myriad challenges facing suburban community leaders and planners in an environment where subdivisions and commercial strip malls are seemingly plopped hither and yon at the profit-driven whims of developers with little or no regard to any unifying sense of community. Even before attending a single planning commission meeting, however, I realized that that guiding an expanding community’s growth is anything but easy, and developers are not always simply opportunistic carpet-baggers.

I was pleased to meet so many officials who, whether or not you agree with their viewpoints on city planning, are obviously in it because they sincerely want to help create a better city. Alderman Ken Skowronski, for instance - - who patiently discussed various city planning issues with me under a scorching sun at Franklin’s anniversary celebration, which he helped organize - - has been on the plan commission for 36 years.

I also feel, even now, a continuous sense of wariness towards me and my inquiries. That could be attributable to the tumultuous recent history of Franklin’s city government (which could be a book in itself), but I also realize that you do yourself no favors by talking to some guy researching a book and maintaining a blog - - it’s just another opportunity to be misquoted. (Local politics is not for the faint of heart; my alderman, the above-mentioned Alan Hammelman, is husband of the former alderperson for a neighboring district who was ousted in a recall election related to a quarry controversy.)

It also may not help that I'm not enamored of Franklin's dependence on collector roads and subdivision streets that seem designed to speed up traffic in residential areas - - problems that plague suburbs across the country.

Be that as it may, here's to another 100 blog entries.

The focus has shifted away from 27th Street and toward a development under discussion at the corner of Drexel and Lover’s Lane/Hwy 100. Beginning today I'll take up the concept of a "City Center" or "City Civic Center" as defined by the Franklin plan commission and its integration into a potential commercial development planned by the Mark Carstensen Construction and Development Company.

I've outlined the "City Center Design Overlay District" in BLUE below; Carstensen's proposed "Shops at Wyndham Village" site is outlined in YELLOW.

Given that the name of this blog is "Sprawled Out," can you see the problem that I see? A public hearing on the possible commercial development is scheduled for OCTOBER 31st.

More tomorrow ...

Turning anti-chain attitude on its head

The "Keep Wal-Mart Out" refrain is familiar and understandable, but why do certain communities have problems with, say, a Starbucks?

By BILL VIRGIN
Seattle Post-Intelligencer COLUMNIST

Wal-Mart. McDonald's. Starbucks.

Three very large, very successful American retailing chains, generators of jobs and taxable sales for their communities. Who wouldn't want to have one as part of their local business mix?

Lots of people, as it turns out.

That some communities would be happier to exile McDonald's to the interstate exits is hardly news, given the attitudes held by some about fast-food joints. And Wal-Mart these days seems to have as much political baggage in its inventory as it does actual merchandise.

As appalled as it might be to be lumped in with such companies as those, Starbucks now finds that it, too, is dealing with community disdain -- although sometimes on markedly different grounds.

 

Link: Turning anti-chain attitude on its head.

"I'm not saying that sprawl is good," said author Robert Bruegmann. "All I'm saying is that it is not necessarily bad."

That's no way to sell books! Excellent commentary of a forum in New York entitled "Can Sprawl Be Beneficial", courtesy of StreetsBlog. Once again, it appears as though so-called "pro-sprawl" pundits have a real apples-and-oranges view of what sprawl is when they seek to demonstrate historical examples. Bruegmann ought to come see the so-called "city center" here in Franklin, Wisconsin before he decides he knows what sprawl can be (hint - it ain't Leicester Square):

Folks who went to yesterday's Municipal Art Society forum "Can Sprawl Be Beneficial" heard what must be the best possible defense for suburban sprawl from one of its recently arrived boosters: "I'm not saying that sprawl is good," said author Robert Bruegmann. "All I'm saying is that it is not necessarily bad."

In other, tepid, words: Sprawl is not good. In fact, it might be bad. But it's not necessarily bad.

Rather than struggle to fill a room in an office park at the interesection of I-287 & I-78 out in Jersey, Bruegmann, who is promoting his new book providing intellectual cover for sprawl, bravely ventured into Midtown Manhattan to tell an evidently skeptical crowd that skyscrapers use a lot of energy, cities have more pavement than suburbs, and sprawl, if you define it the right way, isn't the huge problem that people make it out to be.

Bruegmann says that the desire to flee the city is the natural order of human existence from Herculaneum to today, that it is the natural choice people make when it is given to them. And that we ought to embrace it for that. Casting himself as one who is overturning conventional wisdom, Bruegmann waters down the definition of sprawl as it is commonly understood, rendering the rest of his pro-sprawl assertions more or less meaningless. In doing so, he confuses growth of the city with sprawl. Here is the image of Leicester Square in 1750 that he used in his slideshow to define early sprawl.

London's Leicester Square in 1750: If this is sprawl, let's have some more.

Link: StreetsBlog � Can Sprawl Be Beneficial?.

 

Bayshore center will include upscale bowling

An ironic twist on the book Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Society? From the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:

Bayshore center will include upscale bowling

By MARIE ROHDE
mrohde@journalsentinel.com

Glendale - Put on your designer jeans and get rid of that polyester shirt with your name on the pocket: Upscale bowling is coming to the North Shore.

Yes, you read that right - upscale bowling.

As part of the $300 million renovation and expansion of the Bayshore shopping center - soon to be renamed the Bayshore Town Center - developers are adding a white-linen tablecloth restaurant, six small luxury theaters and an 11-lane bowling center, all operated by the same owner. The entertainment complex will be in a two-story structure adjacent to the rotunda that is in the center of the new Bayshore.

Dwayne Furukawa, the man in charge of the development for Steiner + Associates, was mum on exactly who would operate the entertainment complex but said the movies would be first run, the restaurant would be first rate and the bowling would be an upscale first-of-its-kind for Milwaukee.

Think martinis, not Miller on tap. Forget about brats and burgers and get ready for smoked salmon tartare spoon canapés or sliced sirloin-wrapped asparagus with balsamic glaze. Strobe lights, video screens and rock 'n' roll will replace pinball machines and pool tables.

And, oh, yes, it's likely to cost more - perhaps 50% to 75% more - to bowl at the center than at a traditional alley. A spot-check of lanes in the area shows that non-league bowlers typically are charged between $2 and $3.75 per person per game.

Link: JS Online:.

Alabama looks at New Urbanism

New urbanism zoning revisited

From the ALABAMA PRESS-REGISTER

Friday, October 06, 2006

By JEFF AMY

Staff Reporter

The Mobile City Council is considering a new "transitional business" zoning category, about six years after rejecting a nearly identical plan.

The new classification would limit the size of store buildings, cut down on parking and push storefronts closer to streets.

"We wanted something that would provide protections for the neighborhood, as well as allow developers to still develop," City Councilwoman Gina Gregory said.

The plan is meant for dense neighborhoods, such as Spring Hill, Crichton or historic districts, to encourage walkable shopping districts and ease residents' worries about being located next to a behemoth store and a field of parking.

"It won't be a big developer that will use this. It will be a local developer who has a small site and has a particular use," city planner Frank Palumbo said. "You won't see it on Airport Boulevard."

The zoning category fits with a national trend of new urbanism, a planning and architectural trend that promotes mixing retail, residential and office uses and aims to dethrone the primacy of the car in real estate development.

"It's really not so radical," said Jon Norquist, the president of the Congress for the New Urbanism, a San Francisco group that promotes the planning principles. Norquist was the mayor of Milwaukee for 15 years.

Mobile's City Council could vote on the plan as early as Tuesday. The proposal is set to be considered at 9 a.m. today at a meeting of the council's Public Services Committee.

City staffers and Councilman Clinton Johnson, chairman of the committee, said they know of no opposition to the proposal.

The last time that transitional business was proposed, it came in the middle of a years-long political war over locating a CVS pharmacy at Dauphin and Florida streets.

The council at that time said it was uninterested in limiting the size of retail buildings and instead asked city planners to come up with a zoning category that prohibited some unpopular uses. That way, residents wouldn't have to fear that a bank would go out of business and be succeeded by a liquor store on the same site.

Ultimately, the council passed a new zoning category called limited business, which cut some unpopular uses out of B-2, the zoning category for most retail businesses.

Preservationists and residents cried foul, though, when developers used limited business zoning to erect the Shoppes of Midtown, a shopping center at the corner of Catherine and Government streets.

Preservationists and residents wanted the buildings closer to Government Street, like other nearby structures, and said the shopping center was too big to fit in with houses on a neighboring street.

However, the developer said his clients demanded that all the parking be in front, and the council passed the zoning after some compromises, with some council members saying it was important to be friendly to business.

About a year ago, the leaders of the Village of Spring Hill business group approached the city, seeking new zoning that would promote development and redevelopment of commercial areas along Old Shell Road and McGregor Avenue.

"There's a big trend all over the country to go back to this kind of development," said Linda St. John, president of the group. "It will put a limit on the building size, so the buildings are not out of scale with the neighborhood."

The Mobile Area Association of Realtors is also supporting the proposal, said developer Merrill Thomas, who leads the association's governmental affairs committee.

"This is a way the city administration can be pro-business and still represent the neighborhoods," Thomas said.

Under the new proposal, the maximum allowable size for a single store would be 7,500 square feet. The maximum size for a multi-store building would be 10,000 square feet.

The setback from the street would be at least 10 feet, but would have to be within 2 feet of the average setback of other buildings on a block.

Only a single row of parking spaces would be allowed in front, with the rest on the side or rear of the building. No drive-through windows would be allowed.

Overall parking would be limited to one space for every 200 square feet of building or 50 spaces for a 10,000-square-foot structure. Restaurants would be limited to one parking space for every 75 square feet of space -- for example 100 spaces for a 7,500-square-foot restaurant.

Transitional business zoning would also allow people to live above the store, which is currently only allowed downtown.

Palumbo said the district could be used for infill development in areas that are mostly developed today. He also said it would be an option for businesses currently operating with a zoning variance in residential districts.

"They're not obnoxious uses," Palumbo said of what would be allowed in the new category. "It's perfect for older sections of town."

Planners mainly cited old buildings as examples of what might fit under transitional business zoning. But there are a few examples of newer buildings that could fit under the classification too. Devereaux Bemis, the director of the Mobile Historic Development Commission, named the Gulf City Cleaners location on Dauphin Street just west of Broad.

"That's the perfect example," Bemis said.

© 2006 The Mobile Register

Link: al.com's Printer-Friendly Page.

Albuquerque Apple Store inadvertantly revealed via online pdf

From The Cult of Mac Blog - Great news if you live near Albuquerque - - you have an Apple Store on the way. Apple usually keeps these things secret, but the online pdf plan at the ABQ Downtown development site let the cat out of the bag.

I doubt my local Fountains of Franklin or Shops at Wyndham Village "lifestyle center" developments will pull something like that out of their hats, but I can dream ...

Oak Leaf Trail Phase 3 - Good news/bad news

IMG_0234.JPG, originally uploaded by johnruexp.

Great news for walkers and bikers in Franklin as another extension has been added to the portion of the Oak Leaf Trail that winds through town. Unfortunately, a combination of DNR regulations regarding wetlands preservation and a depleted budget mean that the "phase 3" extension - - which eliminates a dangerous on-road portion of the Trail and provides a safe under-road path across busy Rawson Avenue - - had to be cut short and re-joins dangerous, shoulder-less 68th Street well before terminating at Loomis Street and connecting to Greendale (see my Bike Lane Dilemma post).

 

 

Also, as you can see in my hastily constructed panoramic photo above, the path joins narrow 68th Street just beyond a sightline-obscuring slope. Pretty dicey bike conditions.

The path was funded by an $800,000 federal grant supplemented by about $200,000 raised by J.O.L.T. ("Join the Oak Leaf Trail"). Nominally, the path would have gone right by picturesque Anderson Lake and out to Loomis to join the Root River Parkway with minimal exposure to street traffic.

The hard-left turn you see above was necessitated by DNR-identified wetlands that would have required construction of bridges/boardwalks, each of which cost in the neighborhood of $400,000 - - obviously impossible with the funds available.

No reason to look a gift horse in the mouth - - it's a beautiful path - - but parents who want to take kids all the way to the Root River Parkway will have to be extremely wary of that last quarter mile or so.

See more shots of the path on my Flickr page.

New Urbanism tackles suburbia's sprawl

Ontario developer Remington Group Inc. is hoping homebuyers and businesses are hungry for an alternative to suburbia with its Downtown Markham project.

Situated in the heart of Markham, the Downtown Markham project will combine condominium residential, office and retail spaces all within walking distance of parks and public squares.

Inspired by the so-called New Urbanism developed by the late Jane Jacobs and other critics of suburban sprawl, the project will boast nearly 10,000 permanent residents and 16,000 workers within the next 10 years when the project is completed.

The company is already selling Downtown Markham as a progressive, pedestrian-friendly and environmentally responsible alternative to suburbia. "Wave au revoir to stores inside fluorescent-lit shopping mall fortresses surrounded by a sea of surface parking and say bienvenue to charming streetscapes basking in natural light," reads the Remington Group's website.

Says Bratty: "It's not what my competitors would have done, and I'm glad we bought into this type of development," adding that while he was inspired by similar multi-use projects in Florida and Ohio, he can't think of anything comparable in size.

Once it is built, Downtown Markham will offer 4,000 residential units, along with 4.5-million sq. ft. of office space and 750,000 sq. ft. of retail shopping.

Part of the project, a facility for Motorola, was started five years ago, and Bratty notes that no significant opposition to the project has emerged among local residents.

Bratty said that Downtown Markham's marketing is aimed primarily at young couples and empty-nesters - people who don't necessarily need a big house or a wide backyard. Remington will sell its residential properties at a price "a cut above the norm for Markham" and still own and manage the income-producing retail and office sections. Bratty sees retail space renting for $25-$35 per sq. ft. and office space renting between $18-$22 per sq. ft.

Downtown Markham emerged from civic planning talks between Markham residents, business owners and municipal leaders nearly 15 years ago.

Link: Business Edge News Magazine - businessedge.ca - Ontario Edition - New Urbanism tackles suburbia's sprawl.