John Petro
Making Housing Affordable and Sustainable: Densification is the key
I was invited by New American City to live blog an event today and NYU's Furman Center. The two-day conference is called "A Crisis is a Terrible Thing to Waste: Transforming America's Housing Policy."
The live blog is here.
All of the panelists agree that increasing the densities of our communities is key in making our housing more affordable and our living patterns more sustainable. However, Enrique Penalosa, former mayor of Bogota, Columbia, pointed out that most Americans do not want to live in more dense environments. A recent survey by the Pew Research Center showed that when Americans are asked about what their ideal community type would be, 30% say they would most like to live in a small town, 25% in a suburb, 23% in a city and 21% in a rural area.
I would argue that, while this is currently the case, we are beginning to see a shift of preferences in community types. Younger generations are no longer clamoring for a house in the suburbs and a two car garage. Indeed, the study points out that younger people prefer cities over suburbs or small towns. Whether these individuals will still prefer cities as they get older and have families is uncertain.
Mr. Penalosa suggested that cities should focus on providing the types of services and amenities that the suburbs offer. Of course a city dweller will not be able to have as much personal green space or personal living space as a suburban homeowner, at least for the same amount of money. But cities can provide some of these goods through improving the public realm. Mary Nichols of the California Air Resources Board suggested that cities should provide increased community benefits to those communities that agree to increased density.
One way of achieving this is through Tax Increment Financing districts. These districts capture a portion of the increased property values and sends it back to the community. So, if a community were to agree to a rezoning that increases the allowed density, the land values of that area would likely increase, since landowners and developers can fit more units on a parcel of land. A portion of these increased property values is captured and spent on improvements in the district, such as transit improvements, new public buildings such as libraries, improving schools, and increasing the amount or quality of parks or public plazas. In San Francisco, developers pay a fee that goes into community improvements as part of the new Eastern Neighborhoods Plan.
Portland, on the other hand, is taking steps to change the types of housing options in the city that would appeal to those who are looking for more greenspace.
In 2007, the City of Portland invited architects from around the world to share ideas on the design possibilities of housing oriented to shared courtyards. Portland is promoting courtyard housing as an additional infill housing type that can provide a quality living environment at densities higher than conventional detached housing.• How can courtyard housing be designed to serve as an attractive option for families with children?
• How can courtyards serve as useable outdoor space while also providing environmental sustainability benefits, act as a setting for community interaction while also respecting privacy needs, or serve as a pedestrian-oriented space while also accommodating cars?
• How can courtyard housing avoid a purely inward focus and contribute to Portland’s tradition of street-oriented urbanism?
John Petro: Author Bio | Other Posts
Posted at 3:32 PM, Feb 12, 2009 in Urban Affairs
Permalink | Email to Friend | Comments (5)
Comments
I think I just found out what I am looking for after spending a lot time surfing the net.I am very happy to post my comment in this blog. I gathered lot of information from this site. Nice blog.
___________________
ALEX45
Posted by: Business Opportunities | February 13, 2009 05:03 AM
I think that the San Fransisco and Portland plans are great starts towards a more comfortable urban lifestyle.
I would add to Mr. Penalosa's comments that, whether Americans want to or not, they will be increasingly forced to move to the cities as energy and personal transportation becomes more expensive and as farms and factories become more automated.
This shift to cities appears to be a natural result of industrialization, so anything we can do to make the transition more pleasant will be well received.
Posted by: Alexander Muir | February 14, 2009 02:40 PM
people are more on cheap expenses for transportation even housing and even goods
Posted by: Auto Glass | February 14, 2009 06:17 PM
Homeowner Bailouts = Renters Getting Robbed! Homeowners think I should keep the fraudulent value of their homes propped up just because they were part of the greatest criminal conspiracy this country has ever seen. I didn't realize renters were treated as second class citizens in this country. You steal my money to give to people that work at Taco Bell, so they can keep living in a $300K house. Corrupt homeowners think that just because they WISH their house is worth so much - that makes it true. I hope the day comes when stupid publically school taught renters finally realize they are getting raped on a daily basis by these Yuppie Scumbag Trash & rise up & fight to take back this country from the criminals that run it!
Posted by: JEFF | February 20, 2009 12:24 PM
The recession has hit hard and the media is scaring everyone.
Posted by: Windshield Replacement | July 31, 2009 12:50 PM