Kerry, Just read this article about the suburban design/location of Apple's new HQ affecting it's future recruiting efforts. I figured you would appreciate it.

Why Apple's Suburban Spaceship Could Lose the War for Tech Talent | Wired Business | Wired.com (http://www.wired.com/business/2013/12/apple-suburban-mothership/#!)

Here is the story within the story. This is the original story referenced in story you linked to. The writing is on the wall for anyone who choses to read it.

Companies Say Goodbye to the 'Burbs - Yahoo Finance (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/companies-goodbye-burbs-004800326.html)

Jeff Speck: The Walkable City

Wai4ub90stQ

Did he lose weight, or is my memory from the OU placemaking conference that garbled?

Did he lose weight, or is my memory from the OU placemaking conference that garbled?

Well he does walk a LOT! :D

Those interested in this New Urbanism thread need to know about the film and discussion TONIGHT (Jan. 9) at the OKC Museum of Art - 7:30.
Film and Q&A session with OKC City Planner Russell Claus .

See this thread for the official trailer for the film and more information: http://www.okctalk.com/general-civic-issues/36242-uli-amd-museum-theater-film-discussion-thursday-01-09-2014-a.html

I wanted to post this elsewhere, but what city in the US is the most new urbanist? What is the biggest city to have followed new urbanism guidelines in the majority of their new development?

I wanted to post this elsewhere, but what city in the US is the most new urbanist? What is the biggest city to have followed new urbanism guidelines in the majority of their new development?

That is hard to say because new urbansism isn't new. It was the primary style of human development for 10,000 years. There really are just three things that separate new urbanism from old urbanism:

1) Advent of the automobile as a primary means of human transport (cars vs. walking/mass transit)
2) Competition from suburbs for jobs and retail at the regional level (see the battle between Norman and OKC for GE).
3) Professionalization of the real-estate development community (town founders vs. shopping center developer)

However, I think I know what you are asking so if you are talking major cities I would say Portland followed by maybe Washington DC. Oddly enough, I would also put Atlanta in the top 10. Of course, there are smaller cities that are very walkable and have always employed the principles of urbanism. This includes Charleston, SC, Madison, WI and Lincoln, NB.

Other major cities I would include are Denver, Philadelphia, Seattle, every city in Canada, Omaha, Des Moines, Chattanooga, and even OKC. I am sure there are others people would add.

Well, as for City proper, I'd really have to say that Seattle is way up there. The only Platinum rated city in the US for walkability too.

Yes, I should have clarified that, thanks Sid. I meant city proper.

Kerry,

I'm not sure how well this fits in with your thread but I happened to see this for the first time tonight on PBS and found it to be fascinating.

Video: Profile of Robert A.M. Stern | Watch Architect Robert A.M. Stern: Presence of the Past Online | PBS Video (http://video.pbs.org/video/2151075825/)

I wish, but thanks anyhow Sid. In light of my current problems this subject has taken a bit of a back seat.

don't agree with everything on here, but here a list for people who want to see

http://www.cnu.org/sites/www.cnu.org/files/2014fwf_final.pdf

There more to this story than what is being told and car culture is not declining either.

https://autos.yahoo.com/news/american-cities-are-haunted-by-too-many-parking-spaces-000230791.html

Focusing on People, Not Sprawl | Newgeography.com (http://www.newgeography.com/content/004255-focusing-people-not-sprawl)

Focusing on People, Not Sprawl | Newgeography.com (http://www.newgeography.com/content/004255-focusing-people-not-sprawl)

No kidding, New Geography does succeed at calling out urbanism with issues that we have to contend with. Every serious urbanist and environmentalist has to take the site seriously for the most part.

It's a good site for the most part. They do show a little bit of bias at times and I don't agree with them about OKC's growth related to the economic spill-off from DFW, but they make great points and have good articles.

Why Americans Are Fleeing The Suburbs (http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/why-americans-are-fleeing-the-suburbs-155653589.html)

Is It Time To Stop Subsidizing the Suburbs (https://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/is-it-time-to-stop-subsidizing-the-suburbs--163018799.html)

Why Americans Are Fleeing The Suburbs (http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/why-americans-are-fleeing-the-suburbs-155653589.html)

Is It Time To Stop Subsidizing the Suburbs (https://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/is-it-time-to-stop-subsidizing-the-suburbs--163018799.html)


More than ever Millennials and baby boomers are ditching their spread-out suburban lives and packing it in for the city.

Geez. GenX is absolutely invisible as far as the media is concerned.

Car Dependent By Design - Strong Towns Blog - Strong Towns (http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2014/5/21/car-dependent-by-design.html?utm_content=buffer559d4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer#.U3zsBIHKtMh)

Geez. GenX is absolutely invisible as far as the media is concerned.

Probably because most of the people in our generation are sheep just living in the shadows of the baby boomers. Most of the GenX represents evolution and the millineals (and few of us GenXers) represent revolution.

Car Dependent By*Design - Strong Towns Blog - Strong Towns (http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2014/5/21/car-dependent-by-design.html?utm_content=buffer559d4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer#.U3zsBIHKtMh)

This seems like a perfect description of the Boulevard situtation.


If we want our towns and cities to be less automobile-oriented then we cannot keep doing more of the same - or we will get more of the same. If we continue to zone for automobile-oriented uses at automobile scales than we are going to continue to attract automobile-oriented development. It is that simple.

This seems like a perfect description of the Boulevard situtation.
If we want our towns and cities to be less automobile-oriented then we cannot keep doing more of the same - or we will get more of the same. If we continue to zone for automobile-oriented uses at automobile scales than we are going to continue to attract automobile-oriented development. It is that simple.

Point 1. I agree, but.
Point 2. Isn't it just a bit disingenuous to make our citizens automobile dependent and then, discovering the fallacy, start to design cities for pedestrians? All of your auto-centric citizens will feel more than a little disenfranchised (I'm looking at PluPan). It's gonna require some serious splainin', Lucy.

Point 1. I agree, but.
Point 2. Isn't it just a bit disingenuous to make our citizens automobile dependent and then, discovering the fallacy, start to design cities for pedestrians? All of your auto-centric citizens will feel more than a little disenfranchised (I'm looking at PluPan). It's gonna require some serious splainin', Lucy.

No one is saying to stop building roads to drive on. Simply reestablish the balance between motorist and pedestrian with new roads and rebuilding old ones in urban settings. People seem to think this is an all or nothing discussion without ever really studying the transect breakdown. (I don't remember it well enough to try to give numbers, but I am sure JTF can help with this.) It gradually moves to where vehicles are the primary design consideration but not in the middle of cities. If some want to throw a tantrum over that, that is their problem but one that could be resolved with a little research.

I for one would not mind a 100% moratorium on building new roads, and even completely removing others at the end of their current life-cycle. There is another thread that says Tulsa has approved $1 billion in road repair - $1,000,000,000.00 just inside the city limits of Tulsa (and that doesn't include state roads). When are we going to realize that on the Pedestrian-Auto meter the needled is pegged so hard to the Auto side that the needle itself is bent? What if we increased the gasoline tax in Tulsa so that this $1 billion was collected at the gas pump? I wonder how people would feel about driving then.

No one is saying to stop building roads to drive on. Simply reestablish the balance between motorist and pedestrian with new roads and rebuilding old ones in urban settings. People seem to think this is an all or nothing discussion without ever really studying the transect breakdown. (I don't remember it well enough to try to give numbers, but I am sure JTF can help with this.) It gradually moves to where vehicles are the primary design consideration but not in the middle of cities. If some want to throw a tantrum over that, that is their problem but one that could be resolved with a little research.

Also agree, but I keep thinking about the seeming partisanship about I-235. (BURY IT! BURN IT! EXPAND IT!) I look at what was done with I-40 and can see that what was there (in the old Crosstown Expressway footprint) was horribly disruptive to OKC's organic growth and see Options A and B and think, "They're gonna put up another barrier!" I-235 is another barrier! and the easiest way to fix that barrier would be to tear it out. What will you say to all of those who moved to Edmond but work in OKC? You're gonna have to explain that the solution is the best possible thing for OKC and, if they're ready to, they should move downtown like BennJen(?) and experience the BEST that the CBD has to offer. They don't want to? then they should reconsider (1) where they work or (2) how they get there.
You're right that the future is NOT to not build roads, but to create a diverse set of options so that they can figure out what's best for them. On the other hand, it ain't easy weaning a kid from the nipple to solid foods, and you can bet that most of these people are urbanist infants who will want what was promised to them in the unwritten social contract of 1955 (we, the people, deserve to live the live of the Beav and by GOD! we will not give up our cars! we must have the suburban utopia promised to us by Detroit and Exxon!).
You and I and JTF agree for the most part, but just saying this enrages PluPan and others who think we're saying that we're tired of subsidizing their auto hobby (we are) and would like to spend some of the money that goes to that auto hobby to me and my train hobby (I would).

Let me say this about your last sentence...


You and I and JTF agree for the most part, but just saying this enrages PluPan and others who think we're saying that we're tired of subsidizing their auto hobby (we are) and would like to spend some of the money that goes to that auto hobby to me and my train hobby (I would).

I don't own a train and I never plan to. PluPan DOES own a car, but he needs the taxpayer to build him a place to drive it - otherwise it is worthless to him. I am sticking to the idea that the public funds public transportation and the private sector funds private transportation.

Sorry PluPan - not picking on you directly. I own a car also and it would be just as worthless to me without public funding :)

I like driving too - I drive a BMW now and have had a few "cool" cars including Mustangs and the like. I've bought a couple cars for my kids and I to play with. At one time I was a licensed NASCAR driver for goodness sake! But I also recognize the consequences of some bad decisions we as a nation made in the last century. Many people are starting to understand we went too far in one direction and the economic costs associated with those choices. I simply want us to be smarter about how we develop our cities, towns, villages, and yes, even suburbs. This is actual fiscal responsibility, not the sound bite kind.

I think the train hobby is cool too. Wish I had the talent (not to mention eyesight!) to make something like the models I've seen people make.

Thought I would post this here. Sid and I were guests on the Matt Lewis show. Thanks to Sid for letting me tag along.

Matt Lewis Show: New Urbanism & conservatism « Matt Lewis (http://www.mattklewis.com/?p=7698)

Thought I would post this here. Sid and I were guests on the Matt Lewis show. Thanks to Sid for letting me tag along.

Matt Lewis Show: New Urbanism & conservatism « Matt Lewis (http://www.mattklewis.com/?p=7698)

Kerry, The connection between Christian intellectuals and New Urbanism is not the "Christan/Republican connection" as all across this country there are Christian Democrats and there are Christian liberal, progressive organizations. Black churches, mainline Protestants, Catholic churches all tend to be fairly center-left on issues of economic democracy. I think you meant "evangelical Christians" when you said that. It would be offensive if I didn't know you and knew what you meant, as Christian does not equal Republican. But "evangelical Christians" and "intellectual" are rarely heard in the same sentence. I think what the host was talking about is Kunstler's appreciation for Christians on the left who only identify as Republicans on a handful of social issues, but that seems to trump the bread and butter issues, so they have continued (at least many of them) to hang on to that Republican label. Though, that's changing fast.

Like any live interview, there are things that could been said better or clearer. I thought on the whole it went pretty well.

Like any live interview, there are things that could been said better or clearer. I thought on the whole it went pretty well.

I should have said that. I really did think you both made some very good points.

I'm no tea partier (no scat, right?), but I absolutely love they way JTF talked about urbanism in that interview.

With permission, I'm going to use this quote when I'm talking to my Christian or right-wing friends:

"Biblically, cities were all walkable."

I love it!

Use any quote you think is worthy of repeating. I'm in for the cause not the fame and glory :).

The related magazine article is out.

New urbanism isn't just for liberals ? conservatives should embrace it too - The Week (http://theweek.com/article/index/264451/new-urbanism-isnt-just-for-liberals-mdash-conservatives-should-embrace-it-too)

I disagree with most of this, but here it is for anyone who wants to read it:

Why Would You Have a Highway Run Through a City? (http://www.governing.com/topics/transportation-infrastructure/gov-highway-through-city.html)

This is the problem and this moron doesn't even see it.


Mark Nicotra, the town supervisor of Salina, north of Syracuse, says his community’s economy is built on easy access to highways.

...

“81 is our Main Street,” he says

An interstate should not be your Main St. dumbass. (sorry for the profanity).

I disagree with most of this, but here it is for anyone who wants to read it:

Why Would You Have a Highway Run Through a City? (http://www.governing.com/topics/transportation-infrastructure/gov-highway-through-city.html)

Which parts do you disagree with, and why? Thanks for posting the link.

This article was in the Oklahoman today which extrudes the health benefits on new urbanism.

Healthy lifestyles driving real estate development, even in Oklahoma City | News OK (http://newsok.com/healthy-lifestyles-driving-real-estate-development-even-in-oklahoma-city/article/5005740/?page=1)


HOUSTON — The nation is in a health crisis? OK, so what does that have to do with real estate development?

Which parts do you disagree with, and why? Thanks for posting the link.

I'm wondering the same thing. What's there to disagree with? There's another post (maybe even in this thread) that shows even more striking changes to cityscapes when urban freeways are removed - embarcadero in SF is a great example, but there's a pre-and-post pic of a freeway removal in South Korea that's even more stunning. Need to look for it. Sadly I have a feeling the feds will again point to "increased traffic" blah blah to justify maintaining/rebuilding the freeway.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqMj3E94BK0

After some related discussion via Facebook here is a program that aired in the UK. I can only find the first 2 parts for now but will keep looking part 3 and 4. I think people will find it enjoyable and educational.

Part 1:
dMAgz7kpe2E

Part 2:
16CIS4bat4g

Andres Duany recently met with the architecture, development, and city leadership community in Charleston and read them the riot act on how they are failing. He needs to come to OKC and do the same thing.

The Week of Duany ? Buildings are cool (http://www.buildingsarecool.com/new-blog/2015/3/14/the-week-of-duany?utm_content=bufferb7d7f&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer)


Duany concluded that if a developer or architect does not want to follow these rules, then they can build anywhere in the 101 square mile area*outside of the 4 mile historic district. *Or they can......... "go to Charlotte or Atlanta."

Thought some on here might like to check this out.

www.smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/embargo-copy-foot-traffic-ahead.pdf

I don't know if this is the correct thread for this, but I came across a really awesome article about the "tactical urbanism" going on in Raleigh (and elsewhere):

Tactical Urbanists Are Improving Cities, One Rogue Fix at a Time | Innovation | Smithsonian (http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/tactical-urbanists-are-improving-cities-one-rogue-fix-at-a-time-180955049/?no-ist)

I received this today via private message.

How Suburban Are Big American Cities? | FiveThirtyEight (http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-suburban-are-big-american-cities/)

The author does a good job of explaining why it is so hard to define to urban, suburban, and rural. I used to live in a small town in Georgia (Cartersville) and their downtown was very urban. It had sidewalk cafes, an amazing amount of shopping, fancy restaurants, entertainment venues, museums, etc... - all the things one would want in an urban environment, but if you asked any person that lived there they would say they were rural. For some reason there seems to be a disconnect in the language (which was interesting that the author in the study you linked to didn't define the terms). 'Small town' does not equal rural. It equals 'small town', which can be urban.

I wish there was some way to easily quantify walkable urban, vs. non-walkable urban vs. suburban vs. suburban that is really urban vs. rural vs. rural that is really urban. To me, that is one of the greatest draw backs to the name "New Urbanism", because really it encompasses every level of density from Yellowstone Park to Manhattan (See the rural to urban transact diagram).

The same issue holds true with "walkability", which has only SOMEWHAT to do with the existence and/or condition of sidewalks.

This makes some good points to New Urbanism skeptics. I think the "New Urbanism" label often causes more problems than it solves in trying to describe smart development no matter its position on the transect.

Small Scale Lessons for New York City Skeptics ? Strong Towns (http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2015/5/19/small-scale-lessons-for-new-york-city-skeptics?utm_content=buffer3ba4f&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer)

Adding this here


I thought some out there might find this interesting.


https://youtu.be/Hy4QjmKzF1c

Adding this here (The YouTube video about cities from The School of Life)

I think everything The School of Life (http://www.theschooloflife.com/london/) does is amazing. Some academics see Alain de Botton as "light", but to me, he is a true philosopher because he's actually DOING philosophy. If I lived in London, I would probably spend half the rest of my life at the School of Life and their amazing classes. I've read everything from de Botton (http://alaindebotton.com/) and he is an amazing man. He has influenced the past couple of decades of my life in a profound way.

The only time I have seen him in person he gave a talk about religion. It was amazing to listen to an atheist talk about respect for religion and how the very comforts of faith is important to everyone and to communities. He doesn't care for the atheist evangelists like Richard Dawkins, etc. His book (http://www.amazon.com/Religion-Atheists-Non-believers-Guide-Uses/dp/0307476820/) on this topic is incredible.

If anyone is intetested in protecting some of the most beautiful parks in North America or ensuring new parks employ better designs you might be intetested in this group. I am happy that my city is blessed with an Olmsted park and 2 Olmsted gardens.

National Association for Olmsted Parks (http://www.olmsted.org)

Not sure if this belong here but thought this was interesting.


WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is proposing revisions to current program policies to encourage the design of lower-speed roads to be more in line with community and environmental needs. This represents the start of several proposed regulatory and program policy changes at the agency to allow more flexibility for state, city and county engineers in the design of highway projects.

“This proposed policy change will give states and communities the opportunity to be more innovative in designing their local projects,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “It will help us to build more quality projects that will not only provide more travel options for people, but also support and unite communities across America.”

As a first step in the series of changes in the works, FHWA proposes to reduce the number of design criteria for highways designed for speeds of less than 50 miles per hour from 13 required elements to two required elements. On roads with design speeds of 50 mph or more that typically carry our nation’s freight and larger traffic volumes, the number of criteria would be reduced from 13 to 10.

In 1985, FHWA emphasized 13 design criteria because of the perceived impact on operations and safety. These applied to all projects regardless of the purpose and community context of the road, and FHWA asked for extensive documentation for projects seeking exceptions from any of these criteria.

The shift in FHWA’s approach was prompted by current research in the field of geometric design showing that the majority of the 13 design criteria yielded significant benefits only on higher speed roadways. FHWA now proposes to reduce the number of criteria for lower-speed roads in both rural and urban areas, including main and downtown streets in towns and cities. All projects must still be designed properly for speed and structural capacity, but now design criteria can include other factors. For example, engineers can use professional judgment to determine appropriate lane widths and facilities to accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, bus stops, or landscaping for more livable communities, without needing approval from FHWA. This will enable planners and engineers to more easily design roadways in ways that enhance their community.

“This change is a part of a major push at the agency to give engineers more autonomy in highway design so they can implement transportation projects that better connect with their communities,” said Federal Highway Administrator Gregory Nadeau. “We are always seeking new ways to improve our highway system, and today is a great step forward.”

FHWA is also updating numerous design standards for highways nationwide and eliminating outdated standards and specifications. The updates will place a greater focus on flexibility to address the social, economic and environmental impacts of design. The agency also has updated guidance on bicycle and pedestrian facilities to give planners and engineers more opportunity to include these options in their designs. In many cases this will encourage engineers to design with more sidewalks in mind.

All the proposed changes will make it easier for engineers to design transportation projects more tailored to local travel conditions and provide safer, multimodal solutions that accommodate bicyclists, pedestrians, transit users and drivers.

- Press Release: FHWA Move to Encourage Highway Design Flexibilities Kicks Off with Changes for Lower Speed Roads, 10/7/2015 | Federal Highway Administration (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pressroom/fhwa1566.cfm)

Urb-i amazing public space transformations - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/urbi-before-after-gallery-2015-8)

For those with a more boring life than mine, here is my blog on moving to downtown Jacksonville.
https://newurbanistmovestotown.wordpress.com/

For those with a more boring life than mine, here is my blog on moving to downtown Jacksonville.
https://newurbanistmovestotown.wordpress.com/

Nice looking boys, Kerry. I'm sure you're proud of them.

They are good kids, and starting tomorrow they can walk to the store and buy milk. They have never walked to any store without first riding in a car to its parking lot.

Why you might retire to a tiny house ? by choice - MarketWatch (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-you-might-retire-to-a-tiny-house-by-choice-2015-12-14)

The only thing they got wrong is it is not a trend. Humans always lived this way. The trend is oversized homes and that is what is going away. I recently moved with my two boys from a 3000 sq ft 4-bedroom suburban house to a 1200 sq ft urban apartment and we couldn't be happier. Maintenance is non-existant, no lawn to mow, no yard service company, utilites are a fraction of the price, and when the weekend comes around there is no to-do list.

Why you might retire to a tiny house ? by choice - MarketWatch (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-you-might-retire-to-a-tiny-house-by-choice-2015-12-14)

The only thing they got wrong is it is not a trend. Humans always lived this way. The trend is oversized homes and that is what is going away. I recently moved with my two boys from a 3000 sq ft 4-bedroom suburban house to a 1200 sq ft urban apartment and we couldn't be happier. Maintenance is non-existant, no lawn to mow, no yard service company, utilites are a fraction of the price, and when the weekend comes around there is no to-do list.
I'm really getting tired of you declaring your world view is the majority despite all evidence to the contrary. Glad you couldn't happier, but that doesn't mean everyone else is doing it.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/americans-still-want-bigger-homes--even-though-they-should-downsize-instead-165636763.html
Why are Americans buying bigger homes? (http://www.abc10.com/story/news/nation/2014/06/06/americans-buying-bigger-homes/10056361/)
Dreaming Big: Americans Still Yearning for Larger Homes - Trulia's Blog (http://www.trulia.com/blog/trends/americans-larger-homes/)
^ Only 16% of people want to downsize

5 Reasons New Houses Are Still Getting Bigger - WSJ (http://blogs.wsj.com/briefly/2014/09/30/5-reasons-new-houses-are-still-getting-bigger/)

Why does it matter to you?

^^^^^^
Which poster are you asking?

Gopokes88

He always gets so worked up about what Kerry posts. If he knows the truth, I don't see why it matters.