Zoning Makes the World Go 'Round

As Thanksgiving is now in the rearview mirror (and hopefully the remnants not now attached to our backsides), we forge ahead towards the next round of holidays to greet us in December. By the end of my last post, I realized I left things a little darker than intended, so now I would like to shift back in happy mode for this edition. In that spirit, let's take a look around us to find the success stories going on in the world of land use, and see how much a little ingenuity can change things for the better. In particular, kudos to certain zoning and other municipal measures that have fostered new programs and neighborhoods that seem to make people's lives a little better. Sure, these news items highlight the ways in which these policies can equally create unhealthy, unintended consequences on the built environment, but let's overlook that grouchy outlook for the moment.

Let's start in Chicago, where none other than Mayor Daley, the tree-hugger himself, has spearheaded the city's Green Alley Initiative, which aims to replace impervious, paved alleys with porous paving material across the metropolis. This ingenious approach cuts down on runoff and allows for more natural absorption into the ground, which in turn allows for natural cleaning of the drained water to someday make its way back into Lake Michigan, the repository of Chicago's water system. The city has also set up an expedited permitting process for builders willing to undertake green building techniques. As one pundit notes, "Recycling programs are all well and good, but the things that really move public policy and the industry are things like taxes and the building code." How right Martin C. Pedersen, the executive editor of Metropolis magazine, is. Unlock the power of municipal regulation, and who knows what could be accomplished.

How about in Denver, Colorado, where recent zoning amendments have fostered the rehabilitation of the Capitol Hill neighborhood, bisected by its main drag, Colfax Avenue. Once an open drug market, other more desirable types of activities and residents have moved into the area, creating an eclectic, electric part of the city. Specifically, the city has encouraged street-level retail, and the retention of residential units on the upper floors of buildings. In a plan that would no doubt warm the heart of the Jane Jacobs fans out there, the neighborhood enjoys a lively, active streetscape. In addition, crime has seen a significant decrease - down 40 percent since 2005. Give a little, and let, as one denizen noted, "Colfax be Colfax."

And what about Toronto, Canada, where zoning changes have allowed for the sprouting of Peace Village, a subdivision in suburban Vaughan, north of the main city. Like the Hasidic Jewish communities of Rockland County, New York, and Ave Maria, a community centered around a Roman Catholic Church near Naples, Florida, Peace Village is faith-based -- centered around the Ahmadiyya Muslim faith. The mosque had been built in 1992, but the area surrounding it was zoned agricultural. In 1994, the zoning was changed to residential, and the place took off with the construction of homes on an adjacent plot. The developer worked with the mosque to cater the homes towards members of the Muslim sect, which attempts to unite religious doctrine with modern reality. Word of mouth was sufficient to sell out the initial stock of homes. Although seen by some in Toronto as an attempt to distance the community from mainstream society, the man who foresaw the potential of Peace Village notes that it simply allows for members of his faith to pray with their iman more regularly. Besides, many of the residents commute elsewhere for work. Either way, the benefits to the people who have chosen to live in Peace Village are clear. All, or at least, a portion of the tide was turned with the aid of a rezoning.

The power of zoning and other municipal regulations -- their ability to give and take away -- is omnipresent. They can stimulate many good things, with just a little forethought. There was a reason the Progressives of the early 20th century took up the cause of zoning. Sure, much of their philosophy was misguided elitism. But as the concept has evolved over the course of a century, the true benefits can be seen. The only question is whether this will become the rule, or remain the exception.

For Better or Worse

As we move into the holiday portion of the year, it's alternatively fun and depressing to look back at the prior calendar and see how fast it all went. In the same vein, it is also a popular exercise to look back at the year, and take an accounting on how things are going out there, and revisit our friends to find out how the heck they're doing. I feel like doing the same thing for some of the stories I've been tracking in the land use world over the course of this year. Sure, I'm jumping the gun a bit on the recap for 2007, but there have been a few tidbits in the news that got me to thinking about whether some of these trends and happenings have taken a turn for the better, or for the worst. One story that popped up again in the news is out of my birthplace of Cleveland, which is suffering disproportionately hard from the foreclosure crisis that continues to affect homeowners across the nation. Unfortunately, it appears the fears reported have grown worse. Crime has infiltrated such places as Slavic Village, a working-class community in the metropolis. Not exactly new to crime, the area has nonetheless seen fortunes turn worse when homes are foreclosed. According to one source, on average, once the owners are forced to move, it takes about 72 hours for looters to strip everything valuable from a home, down to the piping. Approximately 800 homes stand vacant in the community.

How about in China, where from time to time we looked at the situations facing the hyper-growth economy of the largest market in the world. One such storyline comes from the Three Gorges Dam project, the gigantic harnessing of hydroelectric power occurring in the hinterland of the nation. After having displaced over a million people, rumblings are beginning to surface about the environmental degradation and geological instability caused by the construction. In addition, as the nation seeks to continue to harness its hydroelectric potential, there is a call for additional relocations and upheaval for more locals. In the end, the economic and social well being of those living in these regions may not be improved materially with all the hubbub. And besides, China is still building coal-burning electric plants to satiate most of the increasing demand for electricity.

With the stories thus far, it is enough to put a damper on our impending turkey fests. How about all the talk I devote to approaches to improve the environmental state of our built environment? In Fort Collins, Colorado, which believes it is, "Where Renewal Is a Way of Life," they are facing two proposed energy projects that demonstrate the difficulty in defining the term "clean energy" sources. One project involves the, at first blush, "clean" source of solar power. The other is the oft-evil nuclear power source. However, at closer inspection, the solar initiative will require the use of cadmium, a carcinogen, and the nuclear initiative, which involves the extraction of uranium near the town, would actually support power plants with no carbon emissions. Why must everything be so complex? Why can't we have at least one feel-good story where everything works out well?

Sure, it may seem like things are imploding in around us. Throw in global warming, and it only makes one even more uneasy as we hop in our cars, and on planes, to travel long distances to be with our loved ones for the holidays. Around this swirling turmoil, it is actually a good thing that it is time for the holidays. Because putting aside the minor squabbles bound to happen when families reunite for the season, be thankful they are there, to lean on and realize that there is still some good out there in the world.

Back to Basics

Sometimes, or if you believe Occam's Razor, it is always the case that the simplest solution is the best solution. Keep it simple, and everything will work out just fine. When it comes to land use, it seems like the opposite maxim is the rule rather than the exception. Somehow, people like to go along with the often more cumbersome status quo rather than trying to change things up. We practitioners are left to navigate through the process with little help. Recently, while attempting to file an application, we were informed that the applicable municipality did not have any records of the building permits that were issued in connection with the existing structure on the property at issue. They asked that we go searching for the permits, because they, as the keeper of the records, must have some record of them before we move forward with our application. Rather than recognize the obvious, i.e., that if the Town does not have the permits, it is not too likely anyone else will, we are left to embark on a scavenger hunt to try and satisfy their request.

Another tidbit out in the world around us that highlighted this point is the crazy system that apparently governs the streets of Costa Rica, where it is almost impossible to find anything, especially if you have no idea where to look. Forget about using Google Earth -- you're pretty much on your own when it comes to seeking someone out in the Central American nation. There are no "addresses," as Americans have come to know them, but instead there are approximations of locations based on landmarks. Postal workers must actually attempt to deliver mail to such locales as "125 meters west of the Pizza Hut," or "from the Tibas cemetery, 200 meters south, 300 meters west, cross the train tracks, white two-story house." Twenty percent of the nation's mail is deemed "undeliverable" -- go figure. The national government is trying to correct this problem, issuing standardized addresses. Thinking how things can go wrong here, it is downright scary to contemplate how anything gets done in a place where no one can say for certain where they live or work.

How about those places where things seem to be working right? Well, the model I always turn to when it comes to land use is Portland, Oregon. Beginning in the 1970's, Portland, among other progressive land use approaches, decided to foster the increased use of bicycles as a primary mode of transportation. Today, Portland ranks as one of the most bicycle-friendly cities in the nation, and its nascent industry to support the level of usage is in turn becoming a vibrant, if not significant part of the economy. As one of the city commissioners has chronicled, "Our intentions are to be as sustainable a city as possible. . . . That means socially, that means environmentally and that means economically. The bike is great on all three of those factors." Who knows how overly-optimistic such an analysis may be, but it does show that simplicity, even in the land use realm, can supply some real answers.

Of course, "back to basics" doesn't always mean "better" when it comes to the built up environment. Take the example of Todd Haupt, an enterprising entrepreneur in Missouri real estate, who is beginning to feel the pains of the market as it comes back to earth from the heady days of the past decade. Out of one semester of community college education, Haupt had parlayed his flipping skills into a multi-million dollar enterprise. When the collapse came, Haupt essentially lost anything, having to start again from square one, to return to the "basics" of having nothing. "I feel like, yes, I overextended myself. . . . But when do you know not to overextend yourself? If I had a crystal ball, I never would have built my house. But when do you know? That's why we're speculators." In a situation like this, it is hard to figure out what may be the simplest solution. In the case of the volatile real estate market, it is hard to see when it will all turn sour until it starts to happen.

Of course, at the bottom of all things land use, the ultimate determination of what is simpler is usually what is cheaper. Take for example the trend in condo building developments, where developers are scaling back from the heyday of recent times when buildings had to offer crazier and more lavish amenities to attract the customer. Today, the reverse trend is in place, where "less is more." As one developer explains, "Costs are through the roof. . . . A developer today has to make every square foot as productive, economically, as possible." Not like this has ever not been the case. But it reinforces the point that to survive in this land use game, change is the key. That is the simplest solution. Of course, as for my predicament, I can only hope to change the municipal minds standing in my way of filing my application.

Roots

Working full-time can be a real drag on the reading queue. I have several shiny books that I have yet to crack, all on account of this pesky occupation I've chosen. Right now (and for the past six months) I'm in the middle of a volume that isn't all that glossy, as my wife picked it up for me at a used book store. It's called Cities on a Hill, by journalist Francis FitzGerald. Not the most outstanding book in the world, and, by this point, it is quite outdated. Nonetheless, what it has done (at least to the point I have gotten) is set forth how certain societal groups have used land use to create identity and a self-contained world for fostering their beliefs and ways of life. Together these communities have established what they see as "roots" in a place they call home. So far I've gotten through the sections on the Castro District in San Francisco, which is often considered one of the first "gay neighborhoods" in America, and the section on the late Jerry Falwell and the empire he had created for himself in Lynchburg, Virginia. Both areas were emblematic of how like-minded individuals could come together and define themselves by defining a place as their own.

Despite the unity exhibited in these two close-knit communities, a stronger force continues to seek to rip them apart. A recent account of the Castro district pinpointed for me the way in which the inexorable land use process tends to govern even the most principled of community experiments. Sure, the death of the Castro has been voiced on many occasions, several times by those who wished it to occur. The resilience of the neighborhood endured, yet the economic and demographic realities of land use have chipped away at the identity of the area. Expensive condominium developments have attracted straight infiltrators to the neighborhood for its "new eclecticism." The gay populace has fanned out to other neighborhoods in the city, and the suburbs. What this really means is that the Castro's initial life as the center of gay culture has evolved into a tourist attraction for the history it represents. Francis FitzGerald noted these trends twenty years ago. Even back then it was the scourge of land use demands that kept the neighborhood shifting and changing and reshaping itself. The same forces will continue to push it into the future, and new directions.

The whole idea of "roots" seems impossible to me in a world where land use forces govern so much regarding the places in we live, work and play. The myth of one's "roots" is further highlighted by the changes that take place to lands that at one time contained not neighborhoods, but instead real-live roots, and the trees that rise on their foundation. For instance, in the Adirondack Forest Preserve, quandaries exist over what to do with 161,000 unbroken acres north of New York City, which were recently purchased by the Nature Conservancy. A good many people want to see the land continue to exist as it has before memory, serving today as excellent camping and hunting areas (for those into that sort of thing). However, because the environmental group has taken on a hefty financial obligation to acquire the lands, the Nature Conservancy has had to concede that it must also be in the logging business and the real estate business. It may even sell off some of its booty to be developed for residential and commercial uses. Even the most high and mighty realize the need to feed the beast.

In a lot of ways, it's tough to see things go. And there must be restraint exercised whenever possible. But there's a reason all of these upheavals happen from the center of San Francisco, to the Adirondack highlands. Only a desire, and big sword, to slay the land use monster can prevent us from continuing our never-ending pursuit to change things from the way they were.

Hot Spots

As with the rest of America, I've been keeping a passing eye on what's happening in Southern California these days with the fires ravaging swaths of land across the region. Hundreds of thousands of people have been forced to flee their homes to escape the flames. The effects are catastrophic, with over a 1,000 homes destroyed to date, and the region being turned upside down. Having just moved from the Los Angeles area at the end of last year, my thoughts turn to the places that I've been that are now either in trouble or have already faced the wrath of the fires. My wife attended Pepperdine, which was on the brink of being engulfed. In Lake Arrowhead, about an hour and half to the east of downtown, friends of mine have a home. Down in Orange County, where more fires rage, other friends live and work. Further down around San Diego, the conflagration has forced the likes of golfer Phil Mickelson to leave his home. The San Diego Chargers were forced to fly to Arizona, to practice for their game this weekend. Their home, Qualcomm Stadium, is being used as an emergency shelter. Even north of Los Angeles, the television show "24" had to suspend shooting in light of the advancing flames.

The sheer size of the fires more than anything else highlights the sheer surface area engulfed by the Los Angeles/San Diego megaplex. And in some ways, this geographic reality, and the land use choices that have been made in creating the Southern California behemoth, have set the stage for such disasters to happen. Essentially an extension of the Mohave Desert, the Los Angeles Basin has pumped in its water, and thus its livelihood, to create the artificial metropolis. Similar to the ways in which 1871 Chicago, and 1666 London suffered the "Great Fires" of the pre-modern world on account of certain practices and land use choices, the same is true of modern day Los Angeles. Whereas Chicago and London lacked sufficient fire fighting techniques and departments, not to mention suffered from overcrowding and unchecked hazardous activities within their city centers, Los Angeles and San Diego has succumbed to being sited on a spot susceptible to drought and unfavorable Santa Ana winds.

There is no place for "I told you so"s in a time like this. In addition, in the course of human events, no matter what we do to prevent bad things from occurring, there will always be a finger to point that suggests it's our own doing. Look to any major metropolitan area in the nation, and each faces some sort of potential for massive calamity. Miami and New Orleans must withstand the ever-growing strength of hurricanes. San Francisco faces the threat of the impending "big one." Even my current home of New York faces the risk of being under water as the polar ice caps continue to melt. And then there's the impending threat occurring in the Southeast, where the water supplies are dwindling to nothing. States, and all sorts of governmental agencies, are fighting over reserves, as the sizes of reservoirs shrink. And slowly the drought conditions going on "down South" are creeping north and west. Are our wasteful land use practices to blame here as well?

At the bottom of it all is the more disturbing hypothesis that no matter how we live, all that our species can really do to stem the tide is to slow down the inevitable, rather than eradicate it completely. Sure, the fires will be extinguished, and the droughts will end. But then what? There are hopeful types out there like recently-minted Nobel laureate Al Gore who believes we can turn things around. But do we really have it in us? And when it comes to our approach to land use, is there really anywhere we can go to prevent us from suffering some level of calamity as a result of where we decide to settle and build? There may be answers, but perhaps the discussion has to grow louder and more sustained.

This is Serious!

Yesterday marked the first anniversary of me throwing out my thoughts on land use to all of you out there. I've enjoyed having the opportunity to do so, and hope to keep it up as we move along. You never can tell how these things go, but I still believe that the world of land use, and the questions it raises, continues to remain highly relevant as we move further and further away from the initial impact of Kelo. For those of you out there who are as conscious as I am to the events happening around us (and I'm sure, some of you moreso), you can see the stakes involved in decisions made by land use boards around the country each day. No, it's not always life and death. Not every homeowner needs that setback variance to build their new swimming pool on his/her property. A multi-billion dollar corporation won't crumble if they don't receive approval for a new outlet that adds to their 10,000-store fleet. But sometimes, these decisions do result in catastrophic consequences for those interested in the outcome.

Take for example the recent case in Clarksville, Tennessee, where a barber shop owner sought a rezoning on his house -- from residential to commercial. Ronald "Bo" Ward came before the City Council for the requested action to help increase the value of his property, which in turn would allow him to obtain a loan to pay off the debt he incurred to expand his shop. The Council voted against the application. In response, Ward pulled out a small handgun, announced, "Y'all have put me under. . . . I'm out of here," and proceeded to shoot himself in the head. Apparently he had relied on a favorable decision to determine whether he would live or die.

And on the other side of the globe, Yang Chunlin, a fifty-two year old out-of-work factory worker, decided to take up the cause of land confiscation going on across China in the midst of its rapid expansion. He circulated an open letter entitled "We want human rights, not the Olympics," and got 10,000 people to sign it. Reminiscent of Kelo, Yang sought to challenge the government's support for securing property for projects developed by private investors. Why the massive support for Yang? Activists argue that over a million people have been displaced in order to construct new sports venues for the coming Olympics in Beijing next summer. For his trouble, Yang was thrown in prison, chained for days in the same position, and assigned to clean up the waste produced by his fellow inmates. For his beliefs, he has been jailed under the catch-all "subverting state power" umbrella. It is unclear when he may be released.

Such stories only reinforce my prior beliefs of the importance of keeping an eye on land use matters going on virtually everywhere on Earth. Perhaps I get a little out of hand with my thesis that land use is this critical, but make your own judgments. Although rare, people take such matters to the extreme by making them life or death choices. There must be a reason. This can be quite serious stuff. As I started this whole endeavor, "The beauty of this unique world is that decisions on where to locate what, and how big, is a highly democratic affair, even greater than voting or serving on a jury." I still believe this. Considering an unemployed factory worker a half a world away can draw the attention of the national media over here, over a petition involving land use questions, reminds me how one person in the process can create a significant impact.

Downtown!

In my head I hear Petula Clark's old hit, "Downtown" racing through my head. Why is that? Well, it could be things are happening around this fabulous land of ours that involves the ever evolving term and place identified by Petula in her ditty. For instance, in Baltimore, Maryland, the push towards attracting more affluent types back to its downtown neighborhoods to populate the newly gentrified housing stock has hit a snag recently. The upheaval in the housing market has sent ripples through the budding movement. Or has it? "I don't see a recession mentality. . . . But you have to be deaf, dumb and blind not to be a little infected by what is being said." This comment comes from a Baltimore bank representative. Is it the media or is it true? Well, probably a little from column A, a little from column B. The reality suggests that the original plan to attract young DC residents to buy into Baltimore, at a cheaper price than in the nation's capital, has cooled. In theory, not a bad plan, considering these new arrivals could do the commute from Baltimore to DC in about an hour by train. The interesting thing in the whole phenomenon is this tidbit, which puts a new spin on the reverse commute -- "downtown" to "downtown."

How about another take on the meaning of "downtown," which is taking place in the most suburban of settings -- the shopping mall. The enclosed shopping mall has increasingly become passe, resulting in reconceptions and redevelopments of them to serve the next generation. One increasingly popular approach is to reuse these spaces as mini-downtowns, where they become mixed-use havens for residential, commercial and office uses. "The mall is the modern town square in most of America," says Joel Kotkin, a commentator on all things land use. Calling them "lifestyle centers," these new places have been created out of the detritus of the past. One example is Nouvelle at Natick, a development outside Boston rising inside of an old Wonder Bread factory and the neighboring Natick Mall. The residences will be incorporated into the existing retail, and the commercial spaces spruced up to cater towards a higher-end crowd. Not exactly a space meant for everyone, but it certainly is another way to think about "downtown." As one new resident of the development notes, "It's like having the city come out to the suburbs."

But there are always going to be certain things associated with "downtown," no matter how people try to reimagine it. Take for instance the issue going on in Barbara M. Asher Square in Atlanta. The gateway to the city's downtown for travelers coming from the airport, the public space is also an eyesore. Homeless folks and others who highlight the seedy side of things tend to occupy the area. Funny smelling smoke wafts through the air. Not all of "downtown" can be nicely scrubbed and fake. There will always be issues. But in a way, that's the whole point of "downtown." It's the confluence of everybody, and every type. Somewhere in the middle of a rehabbed mall and an open sewer. Good and bad. You can take all your troubles. Downtown!