February 2007

Obstruction or Opportunity? Environmentalists Sue to Stop Roads

February 27, 2007

Editor’s Note: Mark wrote this article a few years ago, however, it has relevance today as SACOG moves toward adoption of the new MTP for the Sacramento Region.

Environmentalists recently filed suit to stop some of Sacramento’s federally funded highway projects. The precedent for this was a case that brought Atlanta’s federally funded road construction to a halt because the road improvements would make enough traffic to break Federal clean air regulations. Predictably, business groups and the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) who requested these projects are outraged, portraying their environmentalist opponents at best as obstructionists.

But is this really just obstruction? Having sat on one of the Planning Advisory Councils that helped make Sacramento County’s land use policy, I’ve seen seen how developers and politicians discourage the alternatives to the kind of development that requires all trips be made in a car. The lawsuit “obstruction” may the only way we have to ensure the Sacramento Valley does not become a north-state version of the congestion-plagued, smog-filled Los Angeles basin.

Current development practices offer enormous subsidies to those who build in outlying areas. (Outlying development requires long, unproductive, polluting commutes.) If they have enough political clout, developers can get Cities and Counties to “upzone” agricultural land purchased at $2,000 an acre, making this commercial/industrial/residential land worth $40,000 an acre. They can do this even if that land is godforsaken flood plain surrounded by weak levees. With profits like these, developers can even afford to build a constituency clamoring for the upzone by purchasing a sports franchise. >>Continue Reading This Article>>

Read the full article →

Shocking Health Statistics Call For Better City Planning

February 23, 2007

I read a lot of different reports and articles on walkability. I’ve seen lots of presentations from fantastic speakers on the connections between the obesity epidemic and our built environment, including by Richard Jackson, the former California Health Officer. I’ve seen him speak before, and I love how he just lays everything on the line and does not hold back for political correctness. A recent speech he gave at the New Schools Better Neighborhoods symposium was particularly haunting to me. Here are just a few examples of what he said:

In 1993–94, 6–8 percent of Californians had diabetes. By 1999 8–10 percent had diabetes, and by 2001 the rate was over 10 percent. If you walk down the street in Los Angeles, one person in ten has a disease that will cost them their retinas, their kidneys, and eventually their lives. When I was a young doctor, the fifth most common reason for people needing donated kidneys was diabetes. It’s now far and away the number-one reason. The average 11-year-old in America is 11 pounds heavier than in 1980.

I did this presentation for Governor Schwarzenegger’s office, and when I interviewed for the job they asked me what my priorities would be. The first was preparedness, the second would be the obesity epidemic, the third would be the need for a Department of Public Health—and I am delighted that Los Angeles has taken that lead, which has an excellent health officer in Dr. Fielding.

The governor’s folks said, “Obesity? Why are you so concerned about this?�

>>Continue Reading This Article>>

Read the full article →

Why High Density Housing Doesn’t Work (But Could)

February 19, 2007

When Sacramento’s new General Plan proposed an increase of high-density housing in the county, many real estate brokers and developers howled in protest. Apartment and condominium construction is virtually impossible to finance now. Also, developers are reluctant to take on the NIMBY protests about such projects.

On the other hand, infrastructure and transportation costs—both monetary and environmental—decrease dramatically with higher densities, so the County is eager to encourage such projects. For one thing, viable mass transit is impossible without some increase in the planned densities we build. The question is whether the pedestrian-oriented planning proposed in the new General Plan will make these projects viable when they are not built as suburban sprawl.

I contend what brokers and developers are really protesting is the model of building high densities of the last forty years, or so. This model is called “suburban sprawl.” A typical apartment or condominium building in suburban sprawl is a poor imitation of single-family housing. Their design emphasizes privacy above all else. There is little or no accommodation for meeting outside the individual unit. Most tenants meet neighbors in the parking lot—hardly a place designed for lingering—or when they pound on the common wall to tell their neighbor to shut off the stereo. >>Continue Reading This Article>>

Read the full article →

What is a Walkable Neighborhood: The Epiphany

February 16, 2007

When Eric invited me to become part of the Walkable Neighborhood network, I was honored, and when he asked me to write some articles, I was, again, honored. Then I sat down at the computer and … nothing. I was haunted by the same question, “what is a walkable neighborhood?” Of course there are the [...]

Read the full article →

Loving Life in a Loft: A Valentine’s Day Tribute

February 14, 2007

Even as my four month anniversary approaches with my studio loft in downtown Sacramento, my honeymoon period is still well in tact as my love for all 547 square feet of it continues to grow each day. Like all relationships though, there is that list of daily annoyances that oddly seems to bring a smile [...]

Read the full article →

Back from Los Angeles, With New Partners!

February 13, 2007

I’ve returned from Los Angeles and the New Partners for Smart Growth Conference. There was quite a collection of speakers there and I saw some data presented in a very interesting way. One particular presentation by David Crossley of the Gulf Coast Institute regarding Garden Cities and the City of Houston stands out in my [...]

Read the full article →

Bored? Walkable Neighborhoods Jobs!

February 2, 2007

You may have noticed that we have a new link on the sidebar that says “Jobs.” With the help of Job-a-Matic, we now have a new Jobs section on our website. If you visit our jobs page, you can see the job we posted. We are looking for creative minds to write for our website. [...]

Read the full article →

New Research Proves That People Need Our Company

February 1, 2007

Dr. Larry Frank is a fantastic friend to have.

I’ve never met him before, but he certainly has made life easier for me and others in the walkability field. He is a researcher out of the University of British Columbia. Just about every research project that shows why we need walkable neighborhoods and smart growth seems to have his name (Lawrence usually) attached to it.

His latest research report extensively documents and analyzes the the Atlanta region and produced some interesting results. In fact, the research found what I have been guesstimating myself for quite a while – that about 5% of homes are in walkable neighborhoods, yet the market is such that one third of people would live in walkable neighborhoods if they could (i.e. too expensive, poor schools, etc.). Here is a highlight of some of the interesting findings from the report (My apologies for copying this from the report, it’s just too interesting not to share!):

How Atlantans Travel

Atlantans, on average, drive more miles daily than residents of most other regions of the nation.
The distance driven grows steadily as counties get farther from the urban core. Residents in the central counties (Clayton, Cobb, DeKalb, Fulton, Gwinnett, Douglas) drive an average of 32.7 miles/59 minutes daily per person, while those in the outlying counties drive an average of almost 44 miles/72 minutes daily.

Daily commutes are often the longest trips people make
The average commute distance in the region is 16.5 miles. Commuters in outlying counties drive far more than that. The average commute trip in Paulding County is 31.6 miles, almost twice the regional average.


People spend nearly as much time in their cars on weekends as on weekdays.
The average distance driven on the weekend is just 6 percent lower than on the weekdays. >>Continue Reading This Article>>

Read the full article →