Ryan Gravel, the orginator of the Atlanta Beltline concept speaks on how his plan came into being and it is now becoming a reality. Once completed, the Beltline will make huge strides in making Atlanta a great city and not solely a poster-child for urban sprawl.
This blog is devoted to residential and mixed use infill development with particular emphasis on the Atlanta, Georgia and South Florida markets. The focus is on current market activity, demographic trends and forecasts, principals of The New Urbanism, actual and proposed projects (both good and bad), as well as municipal regulations that both advance and hinder successful infill development.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Friday, November 12, 2010
Moody's Predicts Construction Jobs in Florida to Boom
From: St. Petersburg Times Posted on: November 11, 2010
Will Florida see construction jobs boom? Moody's says yes, others, no
Will Florida see construction jobs boom? Moody's says yes, others, no
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
CNU - FLORIDA Press Release Regarding Amendment 4
The Congress For New Urbanism, Florida Chapter, released the following press release last evening (November 2, 2010) in response the Amendment 4:
PRESS RELEASE
CNU-Orlando: Amendment 4 a "Wake-up Call to End Sprawl"
ORLANDO, Nov. 2, 2010 -- “The people of Florida have given us a second chance to do better planning. Now it’s time to deliver. The massive effort and financial resources needed to defeat Amendment 4 are a wake-up call to local governments and developers to end the sprawl that congests our roads, endangers pedestrians, and chokes off transportation alternatives,” said Eliza Harris, director of Orlando’s regional division of the Congress for the New Urbanism (“CNU”). Amendment 4 would have required popular votes to amend local government comprehensive land use plans.
CNU Orlando’s Advisory Committee is urging local governments to revise their comprehensive plans to make walkable development--instead of sprawl--the default development pattern. “To avoid future proposals like Amendment 4, local governments need to fundamentally change their required development patterns. Miami and Denver did so this year by replacing their zoning codes with SmartCodes and some local jurisdictions like the City of Orlando have started to create space in their regulations for walkable neighborhoods. Local governments in Central Florida should revise their Comprehensive Plans to enable form-based codes and mixed-use, walkable neighborhoods.”
Over the past several decades, the real estate market has seen a significant shift back to living in our downtowns and compact walkable neighborhoods. The market demanded an alternative to compartmentalized, vehicle-centric suburbs. The real estate industry responded with downtown revitalization and New Urbanist communities. Amendment 4 threatened to stop this progress by freezing Comprehensive Plans that often mandate sprawl development in their current dysfunctional state.
“If voters had approved Amendment 4 twenty years ago, nationally recognized examples of good development like Celebration (comprehensive plan update Dec 13 1993) and Baldwin Park (1997 and 1998 updates), based on principles of New Urbanism, may never have been built.
Amendment 4’s simplistic approach would have:
· Discouraged adoption of new standards that promote and support urban, compact, walkable, and transit oriented developments and sustainable economies, which conserve resources and enrich property values over time; and
· Encouraged sprawl by giving an advantage to poorly located and designed development already approved in many comprehensive plans.
“We are grateful the voters realized that Amendment 4 was not the answer,” said Harris. “However, Amendment 4 expressed a very real frustration with growth patterns in Florida, a frustration that New Urbanists share.”
PRESS RELEASE
CNU-Orlando: Amendment 4 a "Wake-up Call to End Sprawl"
ORLANDO, Nov. 2, 2010 -- “The people of Florida have given us a second chance to do better planning. Now it’s time to deliver. The massive effort and financial resources needed to defeat Amendment 4 are a wake-up call to local governments and developers to end the sprawl that congests our roads, endangers pedestrians, and chokes off transportation alternatives,” said Eliza Harris, director of Orlando’s regional division of the Congress for the New Urbanism (“CNU”). Amendment 4 would have required popular votes to amend local government comprehensive land use plans.
CNU Orlando’s Advisory Committee is urging local governments to revise their comprehensive plans to make walkable development--instead of sprawl--the default development pattern. “To avoid future proposals like Amendment 4, local governments need to fundamentally change their required development patterns. Miami and Denver did so this year by replacing their zoning codes with SmartCodes and some local jurisdictions like the City of Orlando have started to create space in their regulations for walkable neighborhoods. Local governments in Central Florida should revise their Comprehensive Plans to enable form-based codes and mixed-use, walkable neighborhoods.”
Over the past several decades, the real estate market has seen a significant shift back to living in our downtowns and compact walkable neighborhoods. The market demanded an alternative to compartmentalized, vehicle-centric suburbs. The real estate industry responded with downtown revitalization and New Urbanist communities. Amendment 4 threatened to stop this progress by freezing Comprehensive Plans that often mandate sprawl development in their current dysfunctional state.
“If voters had approved Amendment 4 twenty years ago, nationally recognized examples of good development like Celebration (comprehensive plan update Dec 13 1993) and Baldwin Park (1997 and 1998 updates), based on principles of New Urbanism, may never have been built.
Amendment 4’s simplistic approach would have:
· Discouraged adoption of new standards that promote and support urban, compact, walkable, and transit oriented developments and sustainable economies, which conserve resources and enrich property values over time; and
· Encouraged sprawl by giving an advantage to poorly located and designed development already approved in many comprehensive plans.
“We are grateful the voters realized that Amendment 4 was not the answer,” said Harris. “However, Amendment 4 expressed a very real frustration with growth patterns in Florida, a frustration that New Urbanists share.”
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
CNU -Florida Position on Amendment #4
"The CNU Orlando Advisory Committee encourages you to vote NO on AMENDMENT 4 tomorrow. The Advisory Committee believes that Amendment 4 could constitute a serious setback to furthering the principles of the New Urbanism in Florida.
Over the past several decades, there has been a significant shift back to living in our central cities and compact walkable neighborhoods. The market has demanded an alternative to the compartmentalized, vehicle-centric suburbs and the real estate industry has responded with urban revitalization and New Urban communities. Amendment 4 threatens to stop this progress and freeze outdated Comprehensive Plans that mandate development patterns in their current dysfunctional state. If Amendment 4 had been approved 20 years ago, wonderful urban communities like Celebration (plan update Dec 13 1993) and Baldwin Park (1997 and 1998) that now serve as nationally recognized examples of good development may never have been built. The obstacles to needed approvals would have been too great, including a required vote by the entire electorate of Osceola County and the City of Orlando, respectively.
Amendment 4 expresses a very real frustration with growth patterns in Florida, a frustration that New Urbanists share and have been working to find and promote solutions to for last 20 years. However, the Amendment 4 proposal is not the best or proper solution to growth management in Florida.
Amendment 4 would require that all Comprehensive Plan updates--including land use map changes, policy changes to outdated requirements and the addition of new, better standards--would go to costly public votes. This brings up many challenges. Amendment 4 proposes a single solution to a complex and important set of issues that face communities on a daily basis. This simplistic approach will have numerous unintended consequences that may serve as a roadblock to increased application of the principles of New Urbanism.
• It would discourage adoption of new standards that promote and support urban, compact, walkable and transit oriented developments and sustainable economies which conserve and enrich property values over time.
• It could encourage parochial and potentially short-sighted decisions.
• It could actually increase the influence of special interests by encouraging aggressive public relations and media campaigns to sway the electorate.
• It could encourage sprawl by privileging poorly located and designed development that is already in many approved comprehensive plans over better development plans that respond to the changing market but have not yet been incorporated into local plans (including infill projects like Baldwin Park).
• It will cause growth issues to be addressed on a piecemeal basis, without consideration of the number of factors that go to supporting more holistic solutions.
• It cannot guarantee better land use planning.
Amendment 4 is not the answer. Local comprehensive plans are intended to evolve over time as a community grows and matures. Amendment 4 encourages the status quo, which in many communities and counties will mean a low density, sprawling pattern of development.
For these reasons, CNU Orlando Advisory Committee urges you to VOTE NO on AMENDMENT 4.
As always the defining document of the New Urbanism and CNU Orlando is the Charter of the New Urbanism: http://www.cnu.org/charter. "
Over the past several decades, there has been a significant shift back to living in our central cities and compact walkable neighborhoods. The market has demanded an alternative to the compartmentalized, vehicle-centric suburbs and the real estate industry has responded with urban revitalization and New Urban communities. Amendment 4 threatens to stop this progress and freeze outdated Comprehensive Plans that mandate development patterns in their current dysfunctional state. If Amendment 4 had been approved 20 years ago, wonderful urban communities like Celebration (plan update Dec 13 1993) and Baldwin Park (1997 and 1998) that now serve as nationally recognized examples of good development may never have been built. The obstacles to needed approvals would have been too great, including a required vote by the entire electorate of Osceola County and the City of Orlando, respectively.
Amendment 4 expresses a very real frustration with growth patterns in Florida, a frustration that New Urbanists share and have been working to find and promote solutions to for last 20 years. However, the Amendment 4 proposal is not the best or proper solution to growth management in Florida.
Amendment 4 would require that all Comprehensive Plan updates--including land use map changes, policy changes to outdated requirements and the addition of new, better standards--would go to costly public votes. This brings up many challenges. Amendment 4 proposes a single solution to a complex and important set of issues that face communities on a daily basis. This simplistic approach will have numerous unintended consequences that may serve as a roadblock to increased application of the principles of New Urbanism.
• It would discourage adoption of new standards that promote and support urban, compact, walkable and transit oriented developments and sustainable economies which conserve and enrich property values over time.
• It could encourage parochial and potentially short-sighted decisions.
• It could actually increase the influence of special interests by encouraging aggressive public relations and media campaigns to sway the electorate.
• It could encourage sprawl by privileging poorly located and designed development that is already in many approved comprehensive plans over better development plans that respond to the changing market but have not yet been incorporated into local plans (including infill projects like Baldwin Park).
• It will cause growth issues to be addressed on a piecemeal basis, without consideration of the number of factors that go to supporting more holistic solutions.
• It cannot guarantee better land use planning.
Amendment 4 is not the answer. Local comprehensive plans are intended to evolve over time as a community grows and matures. Amendment 4 encourages the status quo, which in many communities and counties will mean a low density, sprawling pattern of development.
For these reasons, CNU Orlando Advisory Committee urges you to VOTE NO on AMENDMENT 4.
As always the defining document of the New Urbanism and CNU Orlando is the Charter of the New Urbanism: http://www.cnu.org/charter. "
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)