|
RE: [BULK] RE: Definition of a "healthy community"
|
Laumer, David \"Bud\"
|
Aug 27, 2009 06:48 PDT
|
The irony is that there was never a problem with supply and demand of affordable housing until we started planning communities and even then we were ok until the Courts ruled that economic segregation is acceptable behavior. It is always easier for households with more money, but historically whole sections of a community (or whole communities) were not effectively made off limits by minimum square footage requirements, lot coverage ratios or design standards that work to ensure a minimum level of affluence for anyone building/owning/leasing there.
New development and redevelopment tend to move lower income households from the places that have been rediscovered/discovered to the places that have lost their luster. A century ago that meant that low income households tended to locate in the countryside outside of town or in the gritty (as in steam powered sooty grit) parts of the urban area. The fight to find green leafy places since the 1930's created homogenous suburbs that tended to be organized by income, shunting lower income households to abandoned urban cores and exurban rural areas.
As cities are rediscovered by families who see the value of walkable communities and as cities implement Livable Communities/Active Communities policies, we see more foreclosures on the periphery and increasing demand in the more urban parts of the metro. The households with the most resources always command the most livable places and lower income households are again driving until they qualify--but generally in the opposite direction from where they drove under the green leafy model. So, Brookings and others report increasing suburban foreclosures and urban markets that have held value.
The key really is that we--the planners--have been empowered by the courts to lay down standards across wide patches of a community that effectively ensure a level of economic homogeneity not seen in human history. Of course, the NIMBYs in our communities demand even more separation from affordable housing and the people who live there.
The key is that we are left to attend to inclusivity without supervision and that ensures that the human tendency to exclude "others" remains largely unchecked in communities across the nation,
David "Bud" Laumer, AICP, LCI #2201
Bicycle-Pedestrian Coordinator: Arkansas
Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department
Planning & Research Division
10324 Interstate 30-P.O. Box 2261
Little Rock, AR 72203-2261
Phone: 501-569-2921
Fax: 501-569-2597
bud.l-@arkansashighways.com
Always Expect a Bicycle
-----Original Message-----
From: Mighk Wilson [mailto:mwil-@metroplanorlando.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 7:30 AM
To: WPBu-@aol.com; walk-@topica.com
Subject: [BULK] RE: Walkable: Definition of a "healthy community"
Importance: Low
Dan:
It's not only the quantity of affordable housing, but the location. In many sprawl areas the motto is "drive 'til you qualify." The "affordable" housing is often way out in the hinterlands, far from most jobs and transit. This of course means higher transport costs and increased VMT.
Mighk Wilson
Smart Growth Planner
METROPLAN ORLANDO
One Landmark Center ♦ 315 East Robinson Street ♦ Suite 355 ♦ Orlando, Florida 32801
P: (407) 481-5672 Ext. 318
F: (407) 481-5680
Email: mwil-@metroplanorlando.com
www.metroplanorlando.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Lys Burden [mailto:WPBu-@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 12:11 AM
To: walk-@topica.com
Subject: RE: Walkable: Definition of a "healthy community"
-----Original Message-----
From: Carol Maclennan [cmac-@tchd.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 12:12 PM
Subject: RE: Definition of a “healthy community”
Dan,
The only thing I would add to the very good definitions you've
referenced is access to affordable housing. Next to food, there is
no more basic need (Maslow). Rajiv has targeted affordable housing
in his HIAs on new developments in San Francisco, with some success.
Affordable housing is a growing issue, and the irony is that it is
probably the greatest problem in dense, urban areas (transit
oriented development, for the most part), the very areas that
provide so many of the amenities that promote health - walkability,
great destinations, access to services, opportunities for social
interaction, etc.
In these places, real estate prices balloon because of the increased
aesthetic and economic value of these communities. Often, the lower
income people living in and around these areas are displaced when
redevelopment begins, and afterwards, there are few units available
for purchase or even rent that are within the reach of middle income
people, let alone low income residents (including the most
vulnerable populations such as seniors and the disabled). Some
jurisdictions deal with this by passing inclusionary zoning, but by
itself this tool seldom provides an=2
0adequate number of units to make
a difference. Everyone discusses it, but it's tough to accomplish
affordable housing. In the workshops I've attended, financial/
development experts assert that public/private partnerships are
essential to meet this need. They are apparently the most difficult
financing deals to put together, so strong commitments and
persistence are necessary.
One approach that is being promoted as a partial solution is for
local governments to zone for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in all
residential areas where they are appropriate. ADUs, commonly known
as granny flats, carriage houses, or alley houses, are independent
living quarters that can be internal to a single family home, or an
attached or detached structure on the single family home property.
The size of the ADU is often limited, so the rents are often pretty
affordable. We are working to support ADUs through a Livable
Communities Initiative that our Denver Regional Council of
Governments launched a couple years ago. The initiative grew out of
DRCOG's program to promote Senior Friendly Development, and is being
developed incrementally.
I could send you a ton of information on ADUs, but here is a list of
some of the obvious benefits:
- They require no public investment, but are funded by the private
sector (property owners), who make
income by renting the ADU. This
allows seniors to age in homes they might not otherwise be able to
afford any longer. They can also rent the unit to a caregiver.
- Since they are scattered in different (often high income)
neighborhoods that are often close to transit, good schools,
services and other amenities, it allows the new and growing
demographic - singles, seniors, small families (depending on the ADU
size), etc. - to reap the neighborhood benefits.
- They save local governments additional infrastructure costs, since
they are added to existing neighborhoods. This frees up funds for
other programs of importance.
That was a long winded response to a simple question, but I think
it's importance.
Carol Maclennan
Environmental Health Policy Coordinator
Tri-County Health Department
Greenwood Village, CO 80111
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Burden [mailto:dbur-@Glatting.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 5:02 AM
Subject: RE: Definition of a "healthy community"
Thanks, Carol. Helpful insights. Yesterday afternoon I received a
phone call from a doctor in the San Francisco area who also said
that the definition of health that we use needs to fold in social
integration (not just social exchange or social engagement)... a
point of philosophy to which I wholeheartedly agree.
It is one thing for each socio
-economic group to be engaging with
one another, but another for us to achieve a more integrated nation
in everything we do; by age, by income, by ethnicity, by
everything. We need more grandparents, for instance, living with
the children of their community. We need fewer "seniors only"
communities, more mix of affordable housing .... just one of many
reasons why I believe in ADU's.
Dan Burden, Principal and Senior Urban Designer
Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin
Orlando, Florida 32801
614-595-0976
________________________________________
-----Original Message-----
From: Carol Maclennan <cmac-@tchd.org>
Date: Aug 26, 2009, at 9:14 AM,
Dan,
I couldn't agree with you more. The social and mental aspects of
health are so overlooked. We HAVE to go there.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mesha, Pete <PMe-@wightco.com>
Sent: Wed, Aug 26, 2009 11:25 am
Subject: RE: Walkable: Definition of a "healthy community"
I heard a great quote recently - "The 'indicator species' for a healthy
community is the pedestrian."
Peter H. Mesha, PE, LEED AP
Group President - Engineering
Wight & Company
Darien, IL. 60561
-----Original Message-----
From: mkoo-@aol.com
Sent: Wed, Aug 26, 2009 11:06 pm
Subject: Re: Walkable: Definition of a "healthy community"
I add personal accountability to the list.
Mary Anne Koos
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
|
 |
|
