+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30,...

Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30,...

Date post: 12-Jan-2016
Category:
Upload: gervais-stokes
View: 223 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
Popular Tags:
44
Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional Planning Program The University of Michigan
Transcript
Page 1: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Walkable development is not a drug

Talk at the Design for Health ConferenceMinneapolis, April 30, 2007

Jonathan LevineProfessor and ChairUrban and Regional Planning ProgramThe University of Michigan

Page 2: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.
Page 3: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.
Page 4: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.
Page 5: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Evaluative Framework for Walkable Development #1

Proveneffective

Marketinterventions

Market uninterested or incapable of providing

Market for walkable development

Essence of transportation/ land-use policy reform

What would justify transportation/land-use policyreform?

Page 6: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Evaluative Framework for Walkable Development #2

Choiceexpansion

Removal of obstacles

Municipal regulationconstrains market

Market for walkable development

Essence of transportation/ land-use policy reform

What would justify transportation/land-use policyreform?

Page 7: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Do Developers Want Greater Density than Regulations Allow?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Central City Inner Suburb Outer Suburb Rural

All Respondents

Northeast

Mid-Atlantic

Southeast/Carribean

Midwest

South Central

Great Plains, RockyMountains

Pacific andNorthwest

Multi-RegionDevelopers

Page 8: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40P

erce

nt

of

Sam

ple

Very StrongPedestrian-

NeighborhoodPreference

Mid-Range Very StrongAuto-

NeighborhoodPreference

Atlanta

Boston

Residential Neighborhood Preferences, Atlanta and Boston

Page 9: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

The Gap Between Preferences and Choices in a Sprawling Environment

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Decile in Neighborhood Preference Scale

%

Liv

ing

in

Wal

kab

le/T

ran

sit-

Fri

end

ly Z

on

es

Atlanta

Boston

Strong Transit/Pedestrian Preferences

Strong Auto Preferences

Page 10: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Can walkable development be required (where the market isn’t interested)?

• Smart-growth codes

• Transfer of development rights

• Incentive zoning

• Inclusionary zoning

• Urban growth boundaries

Page 11: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

The Development Request for Proposals

• Signal

• Market Facilitation vs. Market Forcing

Page 12: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

You’ve selected a developer: What do you do now?

• Zoning code

• Other land-use regulations

• Variance – (and how to gauge success)

• Pragmatic Compromises

Page 13: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

The Three Levels of Policy Reform

• Educate while leaving municipal prerogative in place

• Change incentive structure• Share land-use planning authority

between municipality and higher-level governments

Page 14: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Oregon Transportation Planning Rule

“…local governments shall adopt land use and subdivision regulations to reduce reliance on the automobile which … allow transit-oriented developments (TODs) on lands along transit routes…

Page 15: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.
Page 16: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Thank you!

Page 17: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Extras

Page 18: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.
Page 19: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.
Page 20: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.
Page 21: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Framework #1: Sprawl as Potential Market Failure (the drug model)• “[D]oes the invisible hand, which guides the

conversion of land to urban use, push too hard in the direction of bigger cities? Economists use the term market failure to describe a situation in which the invisible hand fails to allocate resources in a socially desirable manner so as to maximize aggregate economic well-being. Is a…market failure involved in the spatial expansion of cities? If so, the criticism of urban sprawl is justified, and measures are needed to restrict urban expansion.” (Brueckner 2000)

Page 22: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

High-Density Requirements are Unenforcable because Capital is Mobile

Higher-density development offers…

Municipal land-use policy toward higher-density development

Development outcome

Greater profits than lower-density on-site and elsewhere

Prohibit Lower density

Allow Higher density

Require Higher density

Lesser profits than lower-density development on-site and elsewhere

Prohibit Lower density

Allow Lower density

Require Vacant

Page 23: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Framework #2: Sprawl as Potential Government Failure (the organic produce model)• “[T]he belief that sprawl is caused primarily by market

failures is based on the false assumption that there is a freely operating land use market in U.S. metropolitan areas. No metropolitan area has anything remotely approaching a free land use market because of local regulations adopted for parochial political, social and fiscal purposes. Most suburban land use markets are dominated by local zoning and other regulations that are aimed at excluding low-income households and that distort what would occur in a truly free market.” (Downs 1999)

Page 24: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Empirical Research on Land-use Regulation• White 1988• Moss 1977• Pasha 1996• Fischel 1999• Shay and Rossi 1981• McMillen and McDonald 1991• Thorson 1994• Thorson 1997• Peiser 1989

Page 25: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Zoning May Lower Densities and Accelerate Sprawl, but…Local Regulation is “the Free Market” (Political Version)

• “Smart growth is inconsistent with the American dream of a big home on a five-acre lot," said David Bliden, executive director of the Maryland Association of Counties, which opposed [former Maryland Governor] Glendening's effort as an unreasonable intrusion into counties' power to regulate building. "The concept of a higher authority, of a Big Brother, is inconsistent with the democratic principles that have to be intertwined with land use management." (Washington Post, August 10, 2004).

Page 26: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Tiebout Modeland Exclusionary Zoning

• “Each community is authorized to enact a ‘zoning’ ordinance which states, ‘No household may reside in this community unless it consumes at least some minimum amount of housing.” (Hamilton 1975)

• Otherwise, risk a game of “musical suburbs,

with the poor following the rich in a never-ending quest for a tax base.”

Page 27: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

The Costs of Exclusionand How to Assume them Away

• “Restrictions due to employment opportunities are not considered. It may be assumed that all persons are living on dividend income.” (Tiebout 1956)

Page 28: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Constructing the Myth of the Market

Provenbenefits

Marketinterventions

Market uninterested or incapable of providing

Framework #1

Choiceexpansion

Removal of obstacles

Municipal regulationconstrains market

Framework #2

Scientific

Evaluation of

Smart Growth

Page 29: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Assume proof of benefit of smart

growth is ambiguous

In Framework #1 In Framework #2

Refrain from intervention

into markets

Remove regulatoryobstaclesregardless

Page 30: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Conclusions

• Market failure vs. government failure

• Travel-behavior science and the “neutral default”

• Choice-based rationale

Page 31: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Metropolitan Accessibility and Transportation Sustainability:Comparative Indicators for Policy ReformFunding:

EPA-STAR, 2007-2010 Graham Environmental Sustainability Institute,

2007-2009

Page 32: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Mobility

Transportation Capacity Expansion

Land-Use

Planning

Travel Demand

Management

Page 33: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Accessibility

Mobility Proximity Connectivity

MEANS

ENDS

Page 34: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Job Accessibility by Car, Boston and Atlanta 1995

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Population Percentile

Acc

essi

bil

ity

Sco

re (

mil

lio

ns)

Atlanta

Boston

Page 35: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Hamilton’s Three-Way Classification of Municipalities

Page 36: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Westminster, Colorado

Page 37: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Can Increased Property Rights Lead to Increased Production of Multifamily Housing? (From Mitchell 2004)

New Jersey 1970

60.2%15.9%

22.8%

1.1%

New Jersey, New Units 1970-1990

53.0%

18.3%

26.7%

2.1%

Pennsylvania 1970

58.6%18.3%

21.9%

1.2%

Pennsylvania, New Units 1970-1990

47.2%

24.1%

25.6%

3.2%

Single FamilyTownhouseApartmentMobile Home

Page 38: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

The Fiction of “Unzoned” Houston

• Subdivision regulations, transportation standards, parking requirements still in place

• Deed restrictions are municipally enforced

Page 39: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

An R-1 Zone is (nearly) Forever

• State of Massachusetts, 1970-1999– Existing single-family areas

changing to other uses: between 0.003% and 0.3% of 1970 single-family acreage

Page 40: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

How a Libertarian Could View Land-Use Policy Reform• In fact, the market’s delivery of private goods is not related at

all to the scientific validity of people’s preferences. Markets can and do supply organic lettuce regardless of whether it really is “better” for your health. The market’s ability to deliver Miller Lite is not at all contingent on the resolution of the “Great-Taste, Less-Filling” debate. European consumers do not want genetically modified food regardless of scientists’ arguments that consumer concerns about such food are without merit. And people pay good money for light trucks because they feel “safer” in the vehicles even though scientific evidence challenges that sentiment. (Peter Van Doren, Cato Institute, 2003)

Page 41: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

By contrast…

• “The New Urbanist fall-back position that ‘...people should be given a choice’ is not plausible; there is no acknowledgement of the fact that markets regularly generate the more feasible choices while discarding the infeasible ones, based on opportunity costs compared to consumers’ willingness to pay.” (Gordon and Richardson 2001)

Page 42: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Even though…

• “An interesting question, especially with regard to infill projects, is whether these alternatives are acceptable to the community at large, as opposed to the prospective purchasers. There are many examples of broader community objections to high-density projects, usually on traffic-generation grounds.” (Gordon and Richardson 2001)

Page 43: Walkable development is not a drug Talk at the Design for Health Conference Minneapolis, April 30, 2007 Jonathan Levine Professor and Chair Urban and Regional.

Proactive roles for planning

• Foster high quality of life at a range of densities through:– Design– Connectivity– Proximity/agglomeration– Open space– Persuasion


Recommended