HomeNewsWake County  }

Imagine Raleigh without sprawl

18 MAR 2009  •  by Bob Geary, rjgeary (at) mac (dot) com



Click for larger image
Map courtesy City of Raleigh
In the run-up to this week's public hearing on Raleigh's draft comprehensive plan, the advice to city leaders from a stream of visiting experts has been remarkably unified. Success, experts say, depends on taking city life "back to the future."

The era of suburban sprawl is ending, these planners maintain, not simply because of high gas prices, but because it is fundamentally unsustainable. As Christopher Leinberger, a fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C., put it in a recent talk, the more "drivable suburban" neighborhoods a city allows, the lower the quality of life becomes for everyone living in them. The fastest-growing market now, said Leinberger, a developer, is for "walkable urban" places: the kind Raleigh doesn't have, yet needs to create, that are modeled on what cities were before cars took them over.

Such places are far more complicated to build and manage than the suburbs, Leinberger said. But done right, these areas improve as they grow. They have more cultural diversity and housing options—and with public transit, the chance for people to save money by owning fewer cars, or none. If Raleigh fails to create them, Leinberger warned, "You will be left in the 20th century."

The question for Raleigh is where these walkable urban places should be.

If you go

  • What: A public hearing on Raleigh's draft comprehensive plan
  • Where: Raleigh City Hall, 222 W. Hargett St.
  • When: Thursday, March 19, 6:30 p.m.
  • What to expect: Raleigh Planning Director Mitch Silver will present the draft plan, a blueprint for the city's growth over the next 20 years.
  • What's next: After the public hearing, the plan goes to the city planning commission. It is expected the commission will consider the plan this spring, then sent it back to City Council, which could adopt the plan as early as June.
  • More info: Read about the process at Planning Raleigh 2030: tinyurl.com/6l8myd
  • Learn more about the plan for the city's neighborhoods: tinyurl.com/dldeyc

Leinberger's analysis and the other experts' jibes with the basic goal of the comprehensive plan to curb sprawl and guide development into designated "growth centers." Yet it also raises the issue of whether the plan identifies too many centers—including some in places that can never be urban.

In addition to the downtown regional center, the plan shows seven other "city growth" areas. Some of the seven are tangential to a string of distinct, "transit-oriented development" zones along a planned commuter-rail line; some are along the beltline highways (Interstate 440 and Interstate 540) and nowhere near the transit corridor.

The plan invites the redevelopment of shopping centers and strip malls along these and other major roads, such as Capital Boulevard, as mixed-used urban spaces. But to hear the planners tell it, such redevelopments are rare.

Adding housing to a strip mall doesn't make it urban, they say. And adding more housing to suburban places may undermine the potential of other locations, including those on the rail-transit corridor, to grow.

However, Raleigh Planning Director Mitch Silver, who will present a revised draft of the comprehensive plan at a joint public hearing of the City Council and Planning Commission Thursday, doesn't think the highway and rail-transit locations conflict. He says Raleigh will grow fast enough over the 20-year span of the comprehensive plan for both to develop successfully.

Silver argues that given the number of strip malls in Raleigh, the city must encourage their redevelopment, using "very robust" bus service and a new zoning code for highway spaces.

But Silver is aware of the question, and posed it himself last month to a trio of planners attending the annual urban design conference sponsored by the N.C. State University College of Design.

"How do we create a public [urban] realm in a suburban realm" dominated by oversized thoroughfares and skinny or missing sidewalks? he asked.

Simon Atkinson, a professor of planning at the University of Texas School of Architecture, shook his head. "The suburb was designed not to have a public realm." The whole point of suburbs, Atkinson added, is privacy.

In contrast, the walkable urban places that the planners describe are typically located on a grid of city streets, not highway thoroughfares. They feature sidewalk storefronts, public plazas and parks that help to offset the mass of high-density housing developments. They usually offer—because of inclusionary zoning rules—a mix of housing types, including affordable units, middle-income and upscale housing, often in four-story or smaller buildings. "Inclusionary zoning is a no-brainer," Leinberger said.

Most such places are accessible by transit or by car, bicycle and on foot, said James Charlier, a Boulder, Colo., transportation planner who spoke at the conference. Once people arrive, though, there are "pedestrian districts" where people can hang out, have fun, shop and live—while the cars are parked.

Charlier calls them pedestrian districts to distinguish the real pedestrian places from the new fad of "pedestrian-friendly" roadways that, despite cosmetic changes, continue to function as "traffic sewers" hostile to walkers.

The only way to turn a highway mall into an urban place is to tear it down, start over on a street grid and connect it to the adjoining neighborhoods, he said.

At the same conference, Mindy Fullilove, professor of clinical psychology at Columbia University Medical Center in New York, said true urbanism is characterized by a sense of connectedness that allows people of diverse backgrounds and incomes to nonetheless feel that they live in the same community and share an identity with the same "great place."

At a time of rapid upheaval in the world, Fullilove said, people yearn for the kind of stability and belonging that existed—before urban renewal cut through it—in the Hill district of Pittsburgh where her parents grew up. It was a relatively poor, predominantly African-American community of row houses, storefronts and apartments. There were no high-rises, nothing fancy. But it was a place where people believed "whatever problems you have ... you can get together and solve them."

Studies show that in such neighborhoods, the incidence of mental illness even for the poorest people is less than it is for the well-off who live in suburban isolation, Fullilove said. Like Edgar Allen Poe's "The Raven," she added, "you can lock your doors, but the problems get in anyway."

Leinberger said his study of metropolitan Washington, D.C., and Atlanta suggests that a city should have no more than a half-dozen walkable urban places per million people. Some of these will be downtown, some in inner-ring neighborhoods, and some in the suburbs, But what they have in common is their location at rail-transit stops, not on highways.

By his math, Raleigh should attempt to create two or three such places, in addition to downtown, by 2030, when the comprehensive plan anticipates the city will be home to 600,000 people.

These places should be on the rail or a streetcar corridor, which, he said, are permanent and attract investors, developers and upscale buyers. "I have never seen a dollar of real estate investment generated by a bus stop," Leinberger said.

3 COMMENTS

> the more "drivable suburban" neighborhoods
> a city allows, the lower the quality of
> life becomes for everyone living in them.

This is personal opinion masquerading as fact. I understand that not everyone wishes to live in suburbia, but those who abhor suburbia should not attempt to proscribe development patterns for those who think suburbia is just fine.

The idea that *all* future development, or nearly all, in Raleigh should be what the city calls "moderate" density (or more) is preposterous. This will actually make sprawl WORSE because developers will just go outside the Raleigh ETJ into Wake County, Johnston, Granville, and Chatham.

Furthermore, while there are plenty of well-intentioned people on the anti-sprawl bandwagon -- I disagree with them, but I respect them -- they're being duped by inside-the-beltline business interests who see anti-sprawl as a way to enrich themselves.

by ct Raleigh 21 Mar 2009, 8:28am Report this comment
...cogent point made about the possibility of high driving lower density development outside of the city limits with this sort of plan. Maybe a greater degree of regional coordination between outlying municipalities with Raleigh and the counties in their regulation and incentive programs could stay this effect.

As an urban planning student, I favor "smart growth" principles that come into play here, although no city can put a general program of these principles into play carte blanche. Each city needs to determine what will work locally to manage growth while avoiding excluding segments of the population and accommodating the desires and rights of residents, developers, etc. Without knowing much about their process (although I've spent a little time in the Triangle), I think it's a positive that Raleigh is undergoing this determination process, regardless.

by RyanHolmes (holmes9@illinois.edu) , Champaign, IL 22 Mar 2009, 3:56pm Report this comment
Albeit quality of life can be a tough concept to explain and quantify, it does hold a positive correlation between it and denser, walkable, community based neighborhoods. Most studies that quantify "Quality of Life" by measuring such factors as traffic commute times, increased spending on gas, time with family and friends, and health and fitness of the population have shown that people living in these denser, urban neighborhoods exhibit better scores for these measurements and therefore generally have higher qualities of life.

Thus being said, it is not the right of a city to force all its residents to live in dense urban neighborhoods by eliminating all zoning districts with lower density requirements. Though if a city truly wants to be seen as sustainable and forward-thinking, it should be responsible for giving its residents a choice to live in neighborhoods located near highways with large lots and low densities and dense walkable urban neighborhoods located near public transit and community amenities.

Without strong regional planning coordination, there is the risk for one city or county to undo the sustainable planning initiatives accomplished someplace else. This is unlikely to happen in Raleigh and the Triangle area. The Comprehensive Plan Draft, which is available through Raleigh's Planning Dept. Website, outlines in section L the regional coordination that will be present among many regional organizations such as the Council of Governments and multiple MPO's that will work to coordinate sustainable land use and transportation initiatives throughout the area. The title of the article may be a little misleading because, again, the concept of Sprawl is hard to define and quantify, but the framework is definitely in place for us to see a "More Sustainable Raleigh by 230".

by Triangle J. NC 25 Mar 2009, 4:07pm Report this comment
Add to the discussion
Post your comment
Add to the discussion
Post your comment
 
return to top