 |
  |
|
 |
||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||
Design
for Living Sometimes it seems towns have only two choices: Stay green and small, or grow large and sprawl. But a few cities have proved that it's possible to be both greener and more urbanized, growing in population and vitality — without forfeiting quality of life for suburban sprawl. As Eugene approaches a critical moment in revitalizing its long-languishing downtown, we can learn from other growing cities that have made our community's vision of a compact, vibrant, green urban core a reality.
Urban planning consultant Gordon Price has been involved in one of the world's most celebrated downtown revivals. As a longtime city councilor in Vancouver, B.C., he participated in many of the civic decisions that made its downtown a marvel of walkability and urban vitality while improving its connection to nature. He's also taught planning at the University of British Columbia and at Portland State University, serves on the board of Northwest Environmental Watch, and writes and lectures widely on urban development issues. Price explained Vancouver's success to an audience of more than 150 at Eugene's Downtown Athletic club recently; he was introduced by Mayor Kitty Piercy, who counts him as an influence on her own ideas about sustainability. Although Price was careful to caution that he wasn't trying to tell any city how to grow, Vancouver's success — and even some of its mistakes — offers lessons that can benefit Eugene. After some "urban removal" mistakes in the 1960s, Vancouver's planners re-started the downtown revival by determining citizens' values. Residents said they wanted a city that was "clean, green, and safe." To achieve those goals, Vancouver followed a recipe for smart downtown growth that included: • Density. Downtowns need sufficient density of residents that retail businesses can function without requiring people to drive from outlying areas. But in the 1960s, Vancouver learned the hard way that density doesn't mean exclusive reliance on high-rise condos and apartments. • Diversity. What draws people downtown are varieties of experience, including schools, community centers, and neighborhood-based supermarkets, parks and other green spaces, and other public social amenities. That also includes a diverse social environment, including 10 to 20 percent affordable housing. • Transportation access. Vancouver strives to give downtown residents easy access to multiple transport options, including walking, biking, buses, taxis and driving. People are more willing to live downtown if they know they're not going to be forced to walk long distances in the rain. Once they live there, however, they tend to find walking preferable to other modes most of the time, which leads to ancillary benefits such as more safety and less obesity. • Design. Planned to be experienced at a stroll, Vancouver imposes design standards such as narrow streets, trees, semi-private space (test: can you walk naked in your living room without being spied by neighbors?), and transport stops and stores no more than a five minute walk away. Developers who wanted to make millions off luxury condos were required to provide attractive affordable housing as well. Even Vancouver's planners have been surprised at their success. The downtown population has exploded over the last two decades — yet the number of auto trips actually declined last year, perhaps a first in urban history. As density has increased, car congestion decreased, as residents replaced driving with walking and biking. Not every policy worked as planned. A parking garage the city forced a downtown supermarket to build goes largely unused as shoppers prefer to walk or bike or take public transit there. When a downtown developer offered to build an elementary school as one of its required social amenities, the city initially turned it down, thinking there'd be no demand — only to reverse course later when more and more families began moving to attractive downtown housing. How did Vancouver do it? By setting clear policies based on citizens' core values, then insisting that developers abide by a clear, strict set of design and other standards that followed those values. Learning when to say no to developers, Price noted, is as important as saying yes. In return, Price said, those developers who were willing to cooperate with the public's wishes received cheap land, permission to build densely — and no mid-game rule changes. Result: They're enjoying substantial profits as the city's attractiveness has lured more residents and business. Vancouver has proved that we don't face a false choice between stagnation and sprawl, that paradoxically, a city can be more livable and natural at the same time it's becoming more urban — if it's planned properly. Eugene can learn from its success.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
