Lipstick on a ‘snout house’?

You’ve heard of snout houses, I assume? Those are houses where the garage projects so far forward it overpowers the rest of the architecture. Developers like them because you can put a garage (a selling point) on a much smaller lot. Architects hate them, and planners tend to look askance at whole neighborhoods where it’s easy to tell that the cars are happy but hard to tell whether any people live there. They’re much more common in the lower end of the price spectrum for single-family housing, but you’ll sometimes see very high-end snouts. I know of one that some neighbors have dubbed the “Taj Garage.”

I’ve read articles about how in some neighborhoods, the garage-with-open-door has become a sort of front porch, where neighbors gather to drink beer, play cards, etc.

But what do you do when you have to keep the garage door shut? Private enterprise (European-style) to the rescue. Now you can buy a garage door photo tarp. The company, from Munich, Germany, is style-your-garage.com. The garage door tarp pictured atop this blog would set you back 289 Euros (about $393).
For a chuckle of the day, check out their wares and imagine them decorating garages all over town.

A morning walk

I walked to work today.

Big deal, you say? Maybe so. But it didn’t seem like such a big deal. It’s 4.2 miles and took me 80 minutes. While walking I called a couple of friends to chat and told them what I was doing (to explain away the panting on the uphill parts). Both acted as if I was bonkers, and both offered to come get me if I needed help.

I didn’t. I’m in decent walking shape – walk an hour a day most weekend days, and 30 minutes or so most weekdays – but this was, I admit, a bit daunting. I had to plan it out, choosing a day where I didn’t need my car for work, with a good weather forecast, and then think seriously what to wear so I’d be comfortable yet not have to change clothes at work. I put my office shoes in my backpack.

I figure the walk only took about 30 minutes more than my usual morning routine. I typically walk 30 minutes anyway. The drive to work and walk from the parking lot take about 20. So it wasn’t hugely time-consuming.

You see more when you walk, of course. I saw daffodils and crocuses and some fruit trees (cherry? plum?) blooming. I saw two places that were complete barriers to anyone wheelchair bound. They should be fixed.

One was the sidewalk in front of the shops at Morehead and McDowell. A utility pole narrows the sidewalk to about 18 inches. Anyone in a wheelchair coming from the south would be completely blocked and have to go in the street. The other was closer to the Y. Repair work at a corner (was it Myrtle?) blocked the sidewalk. I could walk around it, up a grassy hill where a path was being worn away into the grass. No one in a wheelchair could have done that.

I didn’t get run over, though I had to make eye contact with motorists a lot and a couple of times realized that state law giving me the right of way in crosswalks was irrelevant, when drivers were complete unaware I existed because they never even looked. It felt like wearing Harry Potter’s invisibility cloak.

I walked mostly along Morehead Street, Queens Road and Providence Road. It was rush hour so traffic was heavy. Almost every vehicle I saw carried only a driver and no passengers. Maybe 5 to 10 percent had a second person, typically a child. All this on a beautiful spring-like morning with a shining sun and temperatures climbing from the 40s into the 50s as I walked. I started to wonder why more people weren’t walking. Yes, I admit it, the last 15 minutes were not so fun. I wasn’t puffing but I was tired. My shirt got damp, especially under the backpack. But a few minutes at my desk revived me nicely.

And here’s my reward. It’s from a new book I’ve finished, called “Carjacked”: “Just an hour of walking at a moderate pace burns 207 calories off the average woman and 244 calories off the average man.”

No moral to this story, just sharing the experience, in hopes others might decide to give it a try someday, if they can.

The retail horror story we face

This country is facing a retail crash that will make the housing crash look small, says McDuffie “Mac” Nichols, who grew up in Charlotte and is a South Meck alum. He’s talking to the N.C. State Urban Design conference in Raleigh.

“The credit crisis on housing is nothing compared to what’s coming up this summer over commercial loans,” he says. A slew of loans for commercial development are all coming due this summer. And the projects are failed. “Every mixed-use category is in distress,” he said.

The underlying problem: The U.S. has built way, way more retail space than we need. In the U.S. we now have 20 square feet of retail space per person, he says. Compare that to Great Britain,with 2.5 square feet per person. That one drew audible gasps and an undercurrent of aghast comment from the crowd.

One-third of all enclosed shopping malls in this country are obsolete, he says. Nichols, who now lives in the Washington area, grew up in Charlotte and graduated from South Meck. (He’s among the consultants the City of Charlotte has hired in recent years to study Eastland Mall.)

The challenge will be what in the world you do with all those dead retail sites – vast surface parking lots with a building in the middle. That will be one huge urban design challenge of the next decade.

Other needs he’s citing for economically resilient cities:
– strong, high-quality public education.
– much better transit networks, which will reduce the cost of development if you don’t have to spend so much for parking. (See my op-ed today on “How we love/hate our parking lots“).

2:25 p.m – More from Mac Nichols (he’s great): He advises designers/consultants to always say “Parking will be an issue,” because A) They’ll be right, and B) Everyone will be forewarned, because parking is going to be an issue everywhere, for a long time. But, he tells the crowd of designers, make parking work for you.

Don’t overbuild just because someone loves an idea, he says.

“Economics is the foundation of design solutions.” You’ve got to understand the underlying economics. Otherwise it’s like designing a landscape without understanding the topography.”

Charlottean gives his recipe for cities

City planning has a lot in common with brewing your beer at home, says McDuffie “Mac” Nichols, who grew up in Charlotte and is a South Meck alum. He’s talking to the N.C. State Urban Design conference. In home-brewing, he says, you can exercise great creativity, but you’re always bound to the unavoidable laws of chemistry.

The same’s true with cities. You have to take into account the unavoidable laws of economics and how cities work.

How to create and maintain a city that’s economically viable over time? It’s not about get rich quick, he says. You need economic diversity. Example to avoid: Detroit. Diversify before things are gone. Cities that depend on “seasonalities” such as beach or ski resorts are vulnerable, too.

Nichols told me at a reception last night he’s one of the consultants who has worked with the City of Charlotte to study the Eastland Mall situation (several years ago, before the city gave up its options to buy). I asked him whether there was any hope for decent retail in downtown Charlotte, where much of the existing retail space has been torn down, and the new spaces aren’t adjacent to each other. (See “Charlotte’s uptown shopping dilemma.”) His reply: “Shook.” They should just let Terry Shook [of Charlotte’s Shook Kelley Design] draw it and then do what he draws, Nichols said.

Another retail tidbit: You need retail (i.e. stores) in any mixed-use project, but you shouldn’t let it dictate the way the project grows and is built.

Destroying the ‘Drive ‘Til You Qualify’ myth

RALEIGH – I’m blogging today from the N.C. State Urban Design Forum. Topic du jour: “Creating Value: Designing for Resilient Cities.”

9:55 a.m. HUD official Shelley Poticha just finished speaking. Her remarks have a clear bearing on the patterns of city growth all over the country. She spent several minutes destroying the “Drive ‘Til You Qualify” myth – the real estate sales push to just get farther and farther out from a city until housing costs drop to where you can afford a mortgage.
But the current housing bust, she says, is showing the failure of that myth. There’s a convergence of evidence that a host of problems – job loss, obesity, asthma, racial and economic segregation, loss of wildlife habitat, “our dangerous dependence on foreign oil” – all stem at heart from the “dangerous mismatch between where we live and where we work.”

“All the evidence is now aligning to show this “Drive ‘Til you Qualify” myth … is one of the single most destructive decisions we ever made,” she said.

10:55 a.m. – Something to think about. Speaker Jim Held of UrbanGreen, a real estate adviser and planner, talks about the need to think of cities not as a place but as systems. Systems regenerate and evolve. As with any living natural system, they need diversity and connectivity, among other things. He showed a subsidized housing project in San Francisco’s Potrero Hill neighborhood with several hundred units. “Mono-cropping” has not led to a resilient neighborhood,” he said. Plans now call for re-establishing the street grid of 100 years ago, before modernists in mid-century planned the disconnected street patterns.

AND – He talked about ways to nurture entrepreneurs – are you listing, Tom Flynn of the City of Charlotte? Flynn, of the city’s Neighborhood and Business Services Department, has been tasked with seeing what more the city can do to help small businesses.

Here’s one idea –food entrepreneurs. A nonprofit in San Francisco, La Cocina, aims (next part is from its Web site) “to cul­ti­vate low-income food entre­pre­neurs as they for­mal­ize and grow their busi­nesses by pro­vid­ing afford­able com­mer­cial kitchen space, industry-specific tech­ni­cal assis­tance and access to mar­ket oppor­tu­ni­ties.”

With the huge and growing thirst for local foods in Charlotte, surely there’s a way to help start-ups find commercial kitchens and find more markets.

The cost to live in exurbia

RALEIGH – 9:15 a.m. — I’m blogging today from the N.C. State Urban Design Forum. Topic du jour: “Creating Value: Designing for Resilient Cities.”


Excellent quote, to start the day, from NCSU College of Design Dean Marvin Malecha: The design of a community begins with the measure of the first human step.

9:30 a.m. Now Shelley Poticha of the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. She’s been active in New Urban and transportation and other community design initiatives for years. (She’s speaking via Skype.) She has offered some fascinating tidbits.

Costs in Raleigh-Durham to living on the exurban edge: She ran some numbers on the combined household costs of housing and transportation in this area. For people living in the core city, she said, combined household/transportation costs are about 34-38 percent of income. But here’s the amazing fact. For people living on the farthest edges of Wake County, combined housing/transportation costs can be as high as 75 percent of household income.


Federal revolution, under the radar?: 9:45 a.m. – Poticha is describing what has been an amazing, under-the-radar transformation at the federal level, where Shaun Donovan at HUD, with help from Ron Sims (former county exec for King County, Wash., i.e. Seattle) and the EPA and US DOT are – get this – trying to work together to remove federal barriers that keep cities and states from smarter urban growth/planning, or what she described as formerly being “a backwater set of issues.”

They’re trying to change some of the dumb stuff that doesn’t require legislation. An example she cited: Used to be that HUD protocols made it impossible to use federal housing money for developing on a brownfield (former industrial) site. They changed that. Now, if you can get the EPA certificate that your site is OK, then you can get HUD money.
Another example: Used to be if your apartment building qualified for Dept. of Energy weatherization money, then you had to fill out a whole other bunch of forms for HUD. Now, no extra HUD forms needed.
(more)

Extremely cool Charlotte urban video goes viral

Of course those you who you regularly attend the monthly Civic By Design meetings (second Tuesdays at the Levine Museum, 5:30 p.m.) already saw this months ago, but for those who haven’t, there’s an extremely cool video of Charlotte’s urban history that’s in the process of going viral online The last 3 minutes of it were featured on Huffington Post.

I’ve heard from a number of folks around the country asking about it. Rob Carter of Brooklyn was an artist in residence at the McColl Center for Visual Art in 2007, and made the video using Charlotte’s history as its theme. Be sure to listen, not just watch. The sounds are important to the experience. For instance, Charlotteans will recognize the buzzing noise, as the crown is being kicked offscreen, as that of a hornets nest. Other viewers may not know that General Cornwallis, whose troops occupied the hamlet of Charlotte for a few months during fall 1780, referred to his hostile reception as a “hornets nest of rebellion.”

Watching the NFL stadium fly in and land is fun, too. The stadium’s design and suburban-office-park-esque setting in what should be urban territory downtown led some local urban designers (those not on the team’s payroll, at least) to complain that it looked like a flying saucer had landed.

Happy viewing.

Here is a clip from the longer video linked above:


Metropolis by Rob Carter – Last 3 minutes from Rob Carter on Vimeo.

REBIC’s long list of ‘No’s’

Several months back I had coffee with the affable Andy Munn, policy director for the Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition, aka REBIC, the most influential local real estate and development lobbying group. I got the idea that the group, which in the past has had (my words here, not his) a “Just Say No” reputation among local government staffers and environmental and planning activists, might be trying to change its image a bit.

Fast forward to Monday night’s City Council meeting (“Foxx: Be flexible with developers”), where REBIC members were out in force. Mayor Anthony Foxx had put onto the agenda a staff presentation about a cluster of new measures that REBIC doesn’t like:
– the proposed (not yet adopted) stronger tree ordinance.
– the Urban Street Design Guidelines policy (not yet adopted into ordinances and thus, not required of developers, either)
– the post-construction controls ordinance (the only one developers currently must actually follow). Many big guns were in attendance: Bill Daleure of Crosland Inc., Ned Curran of the Bissell Companies, as well as Charlotte Chamber honcho Bob Morgan.

As the Observer editorial board opined this morning (“Don’t let ‘flexible’ morph into ‘gutting’ “) just building cheap isn’t always smart. When you add in the future costs to taxpayers to retrofit and expand your street network/restore polluted streams/mitigate flooding — i.e. millions of dollars — it makes the estimated increment of $1,900 to $2,900 to the cost of new housing (spread over a 30-year mortgage) seem a bit less of a problem.

That said, a city that didn’t look seriously at the combined effects of its regulations on the costs of building would be irresponsible. The point is to look at the big picture and make intelligent choices, as best you can. Further, I hear developers of all types, not just the REBIC types, complain about bureaucratic nightmares dealing with multiple government agencies on complicated plans and technical issues. So complaints about lack of flexibility and/or inconsistencies resonate with me.

But here’s a problem: Even when REBIC has legitimate points it’s virtually impossible to sort them out from the cloud of anti-everything rhetoric it’s been floating for something like 30 years.

I recall a famous scene when then-REBIC executive director Mark Cramer spoke at a City Council debate in 1998 over whether to require developers to build more sidewalks in new subdivisions. Of course REBIC opposed it, because it would force developers to spend more money on subdivisions. (Though I must say I doubt they had to shrink their profit margins.) Cramer, after listening to pleas for good sidewalks on behalf of children, the elderly and people in wheelchairs, noted that sidewalks are good things. But, he added: “You can have too much of a good thing.”

I think REBIC and its close relative, the Chamber’s land use committee, would have more credibility in many of its complaints if it hadn’t, over the years, fought virtually every environmental and growth-management measure proposed by local governments, dating to before the term Smart Growth was even invented.

It’s a long list. It includes: the city bicycle plan, the floodplain ordinance, the stream buffer ordinance, watershed ordinances, the aforementioned sidewalk requirements, a county farmland preservation measure, a pilot project in Huntersville to preserve rural land and efforts a few decades ago to channel the overdevelopment in South Charlotte into other areas by limiting where new sewer lines are built. (That last is a classic planning technique being used all over the country – but not in Charlotte-Mecklenburg. Developer John Crosland Jr. simply got state government to give him permits for private sewer plants and kept on building subdivisions.)

Quite an impressive list of opposition, I’d say. And to be fair I will note that anyone is free to lobby any elected official on anything. When environmental regulations and planning initiatives are gutted or stalled for years, and when city staff is ordered to “compromise with developers” over already-compromised proposals – a tradition staffers hired from other metro areas have told me privately they’re shocked to hear here – it’s elected officials who do that, not REBIC.

Ballantyne ‘affordable housing’? It was there at the start

It turns out that affordable housing – a better term is “below market-rate housing” – was required to be built in Ballantyne as part of its rezoning request, which county commissioners approved in November 1991. This was more than just a verbal agreement from developer Johnny Harris. It was part of the legally enforceable zoning agreement. And the housing was built. (This relates to Tommy Tomlinson’s column today, “Is public housing Ballantyne’s IOU?”, in which he notes that we taxpayers spent millions to create the highways that allowed Ballantyne to prosper.)

Planning consultant Walter Fields, who for many years was land development manager for the Charlotte-Mecklenburg planning staff, worked with the Harris family over a period of years, starting in the 1980s, about their development plans for what used to be called “The South Farm,” a beautiful tract that was part of late Gov. Cameron Morrison’s vast property holdings.

“There was definitely something in there [the rezoning agreement] and they definitely did it,” he told me. He recalled it was small-lot, single family housing. And he pointed out one problem with those sorts of “affordable housing” provisions: Unless other mechanisms are in place the housing is below-market rate when it’s first sold, but after than it sells for whatever anyone can sell it for. Which is why, let me note, there’s still a need for below-market rate housing in the area.

Today, Ballantyne is awash with apartments, which Fields points out are another form of “affordable housing.” He was approached, he says, by a lot of people for help in fighting the now-dropped proposal for subsidized apartments at Providence Road West and Johnston Road. “I turned them all down,” he says. As a consultant he often advocates for multifamily.

And, he recalls, during negotiations with the city-county planning department over Ballantyne the planners were continually pushing the importance of a mix of housing types at Ballantyne.

But the project was controversial, not least because that was in the era when Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools was really trying to integrate its schools, because it was legally required to, part of a court order in effect. (Today, schools in the Ballantyne area are far less integrated than in much of the rest of the county; Hawk Ridge Elementary is 10 percent black; Community House Middle and Ardrey Kell High are 12 percent black.) Some school board members weren’t happy about the prospect of a vast sea of white kids that they’d be required to bus long distances – or, conversely, having to bus another sea of nonwhite kids long distances. Of course, that problem got solved by the dissolving of the court order to integrate …

This is from an article in October 1991, by the Observer’s Liz Chandler:
“Louise Woods [who later served on the school board], representing a citizens group, urged commissioners to make Harris detail how many low- and moderate-income homes he will build.
“We request that the Ballantyne proposal include a section of affordable moderate- and low-income housing,” Woods said in a letter signed by seven others.
Woods also said school and county officials should scrutinize Harris’ plans to ensure Ballantyne is an integrated community. Neighboring subdivisions are predominantly white. The group is concerned about what they see is a trend resulting in long bus rides for black students brought in to achieve integration.”

Suburb slums? (Shhhh, don’t tell Ballantyne)

I caught an intriguing “Urban Vs. Suburban” discussion on WFAE’s Charlotte Talks this morning, interviewing Christopher Leinberger, author of the March 2008 article in The Atlantic magazine, “The Next Slum?”

His article opened with an anecdote from the Windy Ridge subdivision in northwest Charlotte. (A Charlotte Observer article later, in January 2009, reported that half the homes in Windy Ridge had been through foreclosure. And six months after, in July 2009, another Observer article said it’s one of the neighborhoods hit so badly by foreclosures that Habitat for Humanity is buying the houses, now costing less than what Habitat would spend building a new one, and will rehab them and sell them to Habitat-worthy families.)

Also on the show was Jen Pilla Taylor, who wrote a piece for the January edition of Charlotte magazine, “Tale of Two Cities” in which she writes about the growing divide between urban and suburban parts of Charlotte.

“Much of the time, the two worlds are largely indifferent toward one another,” she wrote. “Much of the suburban set is apathetic about the city, with many suburbanites rarely if ever visiting uptown unless they work there. Urban dwellers see the ‘burbs as too far away, too rural, too cookie-cutter. But tensions bubble up in public spats fought primarily by activists and elected officials.”

But Leinberger, a planning professor at the University of Michigan as well as a real estate developer, talked about the market forces and trends that, he has predicted, will bludgeon property values for suburban and ex-urban houses – due to oversupply and to a growing preference for “walkable” neighborhoods. He said on WFAE that the federal bailout of suburban housing has been much larger than the bank or auto industry bailouts. Interesting way to look at it. (This may buttress his point: A November 2008 Observer story reported, “Because it has such a high concentration of foreclosures and subprime mortgages, Charlotte is in line to get $5.4 million [in federal money] to help stabilize its neighborhoods.)

More recently, MSN Real Estate took on the same topic, “Is your suburb the next slum?” a sort of “Leinberger Lite” that quoted Leinberger and some of the same data.

All the articles make clear that not all suburban neighborhoods are the same and that many are thriving and will continue to. Nor do they present every urban neighborhood as nirvana.

But the data show that the more walkable areas with neighborhood centers of stores and workplaces are more likely to do better in the future real estate market than those made up only of auto-oriented single-family housing.

I guess we won’t know whose predictions are coming to pass until the local real estate market revives.