Northern Section’s International Program is co-hosting two “Covid Conversations” with our APA colleagues in New York and the Chilean Planners Network (PLANRED). The first part of the free two-part webinar aired on July 23, and the second part will air on July 30 from 10:00 am to 11:30 am.
It focused on current, compelling topics such as socioeconomic and environmental injustice, racism, social unrest, and violence, and also discussed concerns for freedom, democracy, and governance.
Anthony Drummond was a panelist in Session ONE. Some of you may remember that he is from the Bay Area, went to San Jose State University until 2003, and served on the Northern Section Board as the Student Representative and South Bay RAC. He is currently the Director of Land Use, Housing, and Planning for New York City Council Member Margaret S. Chin (District 1).
On July 30th, Session TWO will focus on housing, transportation, density, climate change, and related social justice issues and responses.
Provided to Northern News by Cal Poly Prof. Vicente del Rio, PhD
Engendering Cities: Designing sustainable urban spaces for all, by Inés Sánchez Madariaga, PhD
Inés Sánchez Madariaga, PhD, is an international planning expert with an impressive amount of professional and research experience. She has published widely, conducted numerous important projects, and held several positions at UNESCO, UN-Habitat, the European Union, and the Spanish national government. Her latest book (with Michael Neuman) is “Engendering Cities: Designing Sustainable Urban Spaces for All” (New York: Routledge, 2020). Link to Ines’s Global Urban Lecture for the UN-Habitat here.
The urban land and affordable housing global crisis, by Geoffrey K. Payne
An architect and planner, Geoff specializes in urban land development and housing in developing countries. He has done consulting and research in several countries, and worked for several organizations including the World Bank, UN-Habitat, and the UK Department for International Development (DFID). Geoff has taught at the Development Planning Unit (DPU)–University College London, Oxford Brookes University, and others, including a week-long workshop at Cal Poly’s CRP in 2009. See Geoff Payne’s work here.
Place marketing and destination branding, by João Freire
João Freire has a BA in economics and an MSc and PhD in marketing. He is a Professor at the Portuguese Institute of Marketing Administration (IPAM) in Lisbon. He has worked with clients from various continents, his research has appeared in several international publications, and he is a founding member of the International Place Branding Association. After years of quantitative and qualitative research, João has developed new ideas and unique methodologies for the construction of place brand identities — the focus of his current work.
Sustainable urban design in a post Covid-19 era, by Kobus Mentz
An architect with a master’s in urban design from Oxford Polytechnic, Kobus Mentz is one of Australasia’s leading urban thinkers. He has worked on over 600 projects in 80 towns and cities internationally and is often invited as a consultant or advisor to help teams unlock complex urban challenges. He is the director of Urbanismplus, a practice active in Australia, New Zealand, India, China, and the UK that is widely known for pioneering sustainability-based practices, through demonstration projects, research, publications, and new methodologies. Kobus is an adjunct professor in urban design, University of Auckland, New Zealand. See more of his work at www.urbanismplus.com
Did you miss APA California and Northern Section’s July Law Webinar? You can fulfill your mandatory 1.5 Law Credits while learning how recent housing legislation preempts local planning and zoning. Just view the Webinar video and log your LAW CM credits.
California is considering additional legislation to address the housing crisis, further preempting local planning procedures. This session, held on July 10, 2020, reviewed recent legislation — including SB 330, the suite of ADU bills, and the Housing Accountability Act — that limited ad hoc review tools in favor of predictable and objective standards for residential projects. Pending California legislation and examples from other states that seek to rethink zoning exclusively for single-family residences were also discussed.
Featured speakers included:
Eric Phillips is Vice President for Policy and Legislation of APA California and a partner at the law firm of Burke, Williams & Sorensen in San Francisco. Before attending law school, Eric worked as a planner and has been involved professionally in California planning issues since 2002. His law practice focuses on land use, real estate, and CEQA compliance, and he has particular experience with State Density Bonus Law, the Housing Accountability Act, and other housing laws.
Stephen Velyvis is the Legislative Director for APA California –Northern Section and a partner at the law firm of Burke, William, and Sorensen in Oakland. He is a land use and environmental law attorney representing public agency and private clients in administrative proceedings and before state and federal trial and appellate courts. He routinely represents clients in land use-related matters including local and state planning and zoning laws.
Questions? Contact Libby Tyler, Northern Section Ethics Director, at email@example.com or (217) 493-4372.
Much has recently been said, and by so many, about the countless inequities in our society and the underlying systemic racism that led to so many. Is there more to be said? We have a universal and societal problem and we need to keep the conversation going until it is fixed. A sage of the first century said, “We are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are we free to desist from it.” (Ethics of the Fathers, 2:21) We must make a start.
I can’t pretend to fully understand the extent that inequities exist throughout our society nor can I, as a white male, fully understand what it is like to be judged and discriminated against because of the color of my skin. Like many of you, I’ve taken the last couple of months to listen, learn, and seek to understand how to make meaningful change.
Call to action
I’m hopeful and encouraged that so many people have taken the time to listen and think inward. Now is the time to think outward and act. In fact, taking action in this regard is part of our AICP Code of Ethics:
“We shall seek social justice by working to expand choice and opportunity for all persons, recognizing a special responsibility to plan for the needs of the disadvantaged and to promote racial and economic integration. We shall urge the alteration of policies, institutions, and decisions that oppose such needs.”
Take the time to understand the implicit biases we have (see toolkits) and — for those of you involved with creating policy — encourage your organization to host a bias training session.
Remember, there’s no action too small to start on this journey, and our efforts should not relate just to our professional lives.
Where and when
For starters, when you hear something that isn’t right, say something. It can be at the dinner table, on a conference call, or any number of places. And, if someone offers you actionable feedback, listen with an open mind.
We all have room to grow, and together we can help shape a better future. We might choose to take action in different ways; however, silence or complacency is not an option for creating change.
So, how do you want to show up for change? What action(s) will you commit to doing? Do you have an accountability buddy or two to make sure you and they follow through?
My immediate and current actions are to write and broadly disseminate this note and to finish reading “The Color of Law” by Richard Rothstein (bought from a local brick-and-mortar bookstore).
I commit to listen and learn how to make things right — and to act!
Via email from Leslye Corsiglia, SV@Home, June 11, 2020
ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE 17, the Diridon Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) will reconvene for the first time since January. (Find the agenda and Zoom information here.) All are welcome. The SAAG and the public will have an opportunity to provide feedback on some of the City’s most recent analyses and proposals related to the Diridon Station Area Plan (DSAP), which you can find here.
While these new city analyses only represent the start of the next phase of public input and discussions, the vast majority of staff recommendations align with SV@Home’s Housing Vision.
The General Plan Four-Year Review Task Force Meetings are also restarting, with the first video meeting June 25. Here are the agenda and details of work to date, and virtual access information. Critical policy areas to be discussed include expanding citywide the Task Force’s recommendation to exempt affordable housing developments in Urban Villages from cost-prohibitive ground-floor retail requirements.
By Leila Hakimizadeh, AICP, and John David Beutler, AICP, June 3, 2020
This article presents our professional opinions, not those of our employers.
THE IMPORTANCE OF SAFE, AFFORDABLE HOMES has become even more apparent these last three months. Those without homes cannot safely shelter in place; and overcrowded housing, not dense housing, promotes the spread of disease. Our housing crisis has exacerbated the covid-19 crisis.
We believe desperately-needed new housing can be added if we upgrade zoning and design standards and adopt policies that promote smart density. As planners we should focus on and find ways to protect existing residents, preserve affordable homes, and produce more housing (the three Ps of Assembly Bill 1487). We must rethink regulations and policies that impede the construction of new housing and that contribute to the housing crisis. These nine strategies remove obstacles to new housing by upgrading zoning and design standards and putting policies in place to promote smart density:
1. Allow for a wider range of housing options, and in more locations.
A monoculture of single-family detached housing reduces an area’s potential number and diversity of housing units without increasing neighborhood livability. We must update land use policies to enable a wide range of housing types in addition to single-family and midrise multifamily, (e.g., duplex, triplex, fourplex, live/work units, townhouses, and accessory dwelling units). Often called “missing middle housing,” these types allow the market to increase housing density and diversity with buildings that maintain a similar scale to single family housing. Density doesn’t mean taller, larger, and out of place.
2. Reduce arbitrary setback requirements.
Setbacks are one of the least-considered and yet most-pervasive development controls. The spaces resulting from setbacks, particularly side yard setbacks, are frequently unusable and do nothing for the urban environment. Over one third of a parcel’s developable land can easily be lost to setbacks, forcing sprawl and reducing walkability. We should know what we are trying to achieve with a setback and how much space is required. For instance, since backyard fences are often six to seven feet high, a one-story building at the parcel line does not diminish its neighbor’s light and air more than the neighbor’s own fence.
3. Remove parking minimums.
Eliminating parking minimums will maximize residential development capacity and reduce housing costs. In expensive cities, the $25,000 to $50,000 cost for each off-street parking space makes housing more expensive and the space required for parking reduces space for housing. In many of our denser urban areas, ride-hail apps, car-share, and bikeshare, combined with walking and public transit, have made personal car storage less important. Furthermore, when self-driving cars become a reality, car ownership will precipitously decline. Cities like San Francisco and San Diego are already eliminating parking minimums and the sky is not falling.
4. Relax stepbacks, the so-called daylight requirements.
To mitigate the effects of taller development near existing low-density housing, standards sometimes require stepbacks for the taller building. But a 45-degree daylight requirement can greatly reduce housing capacity, particularly for small parcels in areas with many existing single-family dwellings. This reduction makes affordable housing less feasible and diminishes our ability to accommodate families in need.
5. Loosen open space requirements for projects close to parks and community amenities.
One of the great advantages of cities is shared amenities. Not every cluster of homes has to provide its own school, fire station, or grocery store. And like these and other amenities, open space can be shared and need not be provided on every lot or for every unit. A house across the street from a park should not have to provide the same on-site open space as a house a mile from the nearest park.
6. Define what we mean by neighborhood “character.”
Some policies require that developments be compatible with established neighborhoods, leading those opposed to development to label a proposed building as “out of character.” “Character” in this context has a fraught history. It has been used loosely and unjustly to exclude minorities and those lower on the socio-economic ladder from certain areas. Cities can set maintaining community character as a goal, but they need to define what that “character” is and, thus, what is an acceptable issue to discuss in relation to new development. A model for this is the study of the existing conditions that define neighborhood character in preparation for the adoption of form-based codes (FBCs).
7. Embrace small lots.
Many land use policies encourage lot assembly, yet large-lot development tends to be over-scaled and inwardly focused. Combining lots is even worse for historic districts or neighborhoods with fine-grained building and lot patterns, and affordable housing developers might not have the means to assemble parcels. Walkable cities are dense but built at a human scale, like many older parts of Bay Area cities.
8. Incentivize small units.
Patrick Condon, in his new book, “5 Rules for Tomorrow Cities” (2020), discusses the “collapse of birth-rate” worldwide. As of 2018, the average number of births per woman in the US was 1.73 and declining. Family housing is important, but cities should also provide smaller, less expensive units to match trends in family size and allow more people to enter the housing market. Regulations or policies that cap the number of units (but not the building area) encourage fewer, larger units and discourage smaller, more affordable units.
9. Influence the conversion of outdated malls and big box stores to housing.
Changes in the retail market and potential state-level action (as proposed in SB 1385) will be stimulating the conversion of big box stores, empty parking lots, and outdated shopping malls to housing. Rather than be caught off guard, municipalities can be proactive in creating design standards for this conversion and by enabling horizontal mixed-use development.
Let’s get to work
Even though we are beset by covid-19 and other crises, we must not lose sight of our longest running crisis, a woefully inadequate supply of all kinds of housing. Rather than succumb to the illusion that a particular building style should dominate, we need to provide housing of all types in our urban and suburban areas. We offered nine policy recommendations to help you craft the regulations that will create the better and more inclusive cities we all want.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Leila Hakimizadeh, AICP, is a Planner IV-Supervising Planner with extensive experience in land use and transportation planning, urban design and housing. She is a socially-conscious, passionate, determined change-maker and city builder. Leila utilizes equity, diversity, inclusiveness, sustainability and public health measures to facilitate greater community engagement and create lasting impacts for a diverse population. She uses her consensus-building and analytical skills to address urban planning challenges with creative solutions. You can reach her at firstname.lastname@example.org.
John David Beutler, AICP, has worked as an urban designer at the intersection of urbanism, land use, and transportation for the last 20 years, first at Calthorpe Associates and then Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (SOM). John’s work has focused on the importance of human scale and human-centric design in addressing issues of sustainability and equity. He works at scales from the building to the street, neighborhood, city and region. You can reach him at email@example.com
“ ‘Housing is health care,’ explained Abigail Stewart-Kahn, director of the San Francisco Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing. Now, the connection was inescapable — people who lacked housing were also outside of the health care system, and during a pandemic, their presence on the streets created a risk for everyone else in the city. ‘What this has shown us all is that everyone’s health is intertwined,’ she said.
“While the number of coronavirus cases and deaths remain low, the full gloom of the coming recession descend into view, and … in the absence of more help from the state and the federal government, or from the region’s billionaires, the Bay Area’s needs simply outmatch its capacity to meet them.
“Margot Kushel, a physician and scholar of homelessness at UCSF, suggested that this was the ‘nightmare scenario’ for inequality in San Francisco: low-income jobs disappear, so more people lose their homes, but because the tech industry keeps doing well, home prices remain high, and housing slips further out of reach for everyone else.
“But I wouldn’t be surprised if we — the people of the Bay Area, our lawmakers, our billionaires and our ordinary, overburdened citizens — end up squandering this moment. Rebuilding a fairer, more livable urban environment will take years of difficult work. It will require sacrifices from the wealthy. It will require a renewed federal interest in addressing the problems of cities. It will require abandoning pie-in-the-sky techno-optimism.
“This isn’t a problem that will be solved by flying cars; it will be solved by better zoning laws, fairer taxes and, when we can make it safe again, more public transportation. We will have to commit ourselves to these and other boring but permanent civic solutions.
“We cannot go back to the way things were. But as the immediate danger of the pandemic recedes, it will be all too easy for many of us to do exactly that.”
Via email from Leslye Corsiglia, SV@Home, June 11, 2020. The SAAG will meet for the first time since January. All are welcome. Take the opportunity to offer feedback on the City’s most recent analyses and proposals related to the Diridon Station Area Plan. The General Plan Four-Year Review Task Force is also restarting, with the first video meeting June 25.
By Marisa Kendall, The Mercury News, May 7, 2020. Ruling ends a years-long battle over massive redevelopment of failed shopping mall in Cupertino. Decisions in two SB 35 cases say cities must apply objective design and planning standards in a very clear way.
By Jeff Davis, Eno Center for Transportation, April 8, 2020. Gas rationing wasn’t rolled out to the whole country until December 1, 1942. But the VMT reductions were obvious as soon as rationing started in the East six months earlier.
By Bruce Schaller, CityLab, May 4, 2020. Americans have always had difficulty with urban density, but in a crisis, we need what cities can provide. (Schaller is the former deputy commissioner of traffic and planning at the New York City Transportation Dept.)
By Adie Tomer and Lara Fishbine, Brookings, May 1, 2020. If leaders encourage telework, alter revenues structures, and retrofit roadways, the nation can emerge from the pandemic with stronger and safer transportation.
By Jeff Davis, Eno Center for Transportation, April 8, 2020
“No one is quite sure how much vehicle miles-traveled (VMT) has decreased [as a result of pandemic stay-at-home orders]. All we have so far are estimates based on anonymized cell phone data and some anecdotal information from toll bridge and turnpike collections. But a drop of at least 40 percent in non-truck VMT would not be surprising.
“[For] some precedent into what happens when government forces a drastic reduction in VMT … the World War II experience in gasoline rationing may provide some interesting parallels.
“WWII gas rationing was never really about saving gasoline. The U.S. had plenty of oil production and refinery capacity as of 1941. The problem was rubber. Natural rubber was (and is to this day) the only way to make high-pressure airplane tires.
“FDR ordered gasoline rationing in the 17 Eastern Seaboard states on May 12, 1942 [as a way to save rubber. But] a blue-ribbon panel [appointed by the president and] headed by Bernard Baruch [reported that] ‘Gas rationing is the only way of saving rubber. Every way of avoiding this method was explored, but it was found to be inescapable. That is why the restriction is to be nationwide. Any localized measure would be unfair and futile.’
“Accordingly, President Roosevelt ordered the gas rationing program extended to the whole country on November 6, 1942, with the effective date later postponed to December 1, 1942.
“But once gas rationing in the East started in mid-May, the results were obvious.
1st Half of May 1942 (vs 1941)
2nd Half of May 1942 (vs 1941)
Nationwide “passenger car VMT in 1943 [showed] a 43 percent reduction from the 1941 peak. VMT started to pick up in 1945 as the war wound down. Truck traffic also dropped, but not so sharply — a 15 percent drop in 1942 followed by another 9 percent drop in 1943.”
The full article presents interesting data, including a considerable bonus effect on safety:
“The drop in VMT, the removal of most single males ages 18-35 from the pool of domestic drivers, and the nationwide 35 mile an hour speed limit imposed by the Office of Defense Transportation in September 1942 all had a marked effect on traffic safety during World War II. Highway fatalities dropped from just over 38,000 in 1941 to around 23,000 per year in 1943 and 1944.”