- 1. 12 Planning Successes John D. Landis Department of City
& Regional Planning University of Pennsylvania October 20 2010
PennDesign Alums and Friends
2. Outline
- Institutionalizing Success
3. Why Study Success?
- Planning as a discipline pays inadequate attention to
evaluating its success and failures:
-
- Interventions are mostly long-term; values and tastes change;
people move on in their concerns.
-
- Effort and process is more important than outcome.
-
- Lack of predictive theories and models against which to
evaluate success.
-
- Lack of schooling in importance and methods of evaluation.
-
- Little $ in the budget for evaluation.
4. Why Study Success?
- As a result, planning successes often get defined by others,
usually as a lack of success:
-
- Public interest and Benefit-Cost critique of the1960s:
-
-
- Planning as the hand-maiden of established political and
business interests.
-
-
- Traditional evaluations are too narrow, and fail to consider
externalities, incommensurables, and distributional impacts
-
- Martin Anderson, Irving Kristol & Nathan Glazer:Government
and planning characteristically over-reach and under-analyze
rational responses.
-
- Reagan Revolution:Government (and by extension, and public
efforts) are the problem not the solution.
5. A Rejoinder to Hall & OToole
- PETER HALL (Great Planning Disasters,1982): During the 1950s,
1960s, and 1970s, planners worldwide suffered from:
- Fascination with technology
- Belief that existing cities could be massively reshaped
- Faith in normative plans implemented through regulation
- Skepticism of markets, competition & and incentives.
- RANDAL OTOOLE ( Best Laid Plans ):Compared to the market,
planners always misallocate resources:
- Over-favor higher densities
- Over-favor public transit over cars
6. IdentifyingPlanning Success?
- Plan that is implemented and doesnt just sit on theshelfToo
simplistic.
- Plan or program that achieves its goals and objectives What
about cost?
- Plan, program, or project that generates quantifiable benefits
in excess of costs Not everything can be fully monetized and
discounted.
- Local and public initiative focusing on the built or natural
environment which results in a net private and social benefit, and
which can serve as model for similar efforts.
7. Parsing Planning Success
- Localandpublic initiative focusing on thebuilt or natural
environmentwhich results in a net private and social benefit, and
which can serve asmodel for similar efforts .
Does NOT include projects initiated by federal agencies, by
private businesses or business councils, by private landowners or
developers, or by public-private-partnerships or community
development corporations lacking public accountability. Projects
which have physical or place-based dimension to them, including
most types of land use and environmental regulationsMust be
spatially-based.Does NOT include national policy initiatives or
programs.Should work as projected and be replicable in comparable
circumstances. 8. TwelvePost-1973Planning Successes
- California Coastal Act & Commission
- Planning-Zoning Consistency Laws
- Northeast Corridor Improvement Project
- Portland Urban Growth Boundaries
- NYC Public-Private Partnerships
- Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program
- Historic Preservation Tax Credits
plusurban waterfronts, festival marketplaces, anti-pollution
laws, HOPE VI, inclusionary zoning ordinances & thousands of
local comprehensive plans 9. 1. California Coastal Act&
Commission - 1972
- Set up California Coastal Commission
- Regulates development & insures access in entire coastal
zone
- Coordinates Local Coastal Plans (LCPs)
-
- Successful resource protection
-
- Good cop/Bad cop but bad cop only occasionally
-
- Works with local government to build capacity.
-
- Consistent with Californias self-image as environmental
leader.
10. 2. Chesapeake Bay Program - 1983
- Interstate partnership involving three states, more than a
dozen federal agencies, and many state and local institutions in a
collaborative, science-based effort to improve the Chesapeake Bay
ecosystem by limiting development, pollution, and runoff; and
promoting restoration.
-
- Science-based; collaborative
-
- Works through existing political system
-
- Shared gain (improved ecology) and shared pain (restricts
development & farming)
-
- Tries to respect existing property rights.
11. 3. Planning-Zoning Consistency Requirements
- Required in about a dozen states
- Requires that municipal zoning ordinance be consistent with
local comprehensive plan (and usually subdivision ordinances)
- Plan changes must accompany zoning changes
-
- Requires individual development decisions to adhere to a larger
framework.Deters ad hoc actions and developments.
-
- Links conditions of approval to broader public purpose.
-
- Promotes consistency and certainty.
12. 4. NE Corridor Improvement Project - 1976
- Boston to NYC in 3 hours; NYC to Washington, DC in 2 hours/45
minutes; cutting previous travel times by 50%.
- 4-R Act of 1976 creating NCEIP program authorizing $2.6B of
R-O-W upgrades
- Phase II in 1991 ($2.5B) funding further track and station
upgrades and Acela Express.
-
- Incremental, but results in real travel time and convenience
improvements.
-
- An existing mode, subject to competition.
-
- Station area improvements come later, after service
improvements.
13. 5. Portlands Urban Growth Boundary - 1979
- Established in 1979, covers 350 sqM in 24 municipalities in 3
counties, including city of Portland.Administered by Portland
Metro.
- Principle purpose is to rationalize conversion of farmland to
subdivisions.
- Must be reviewed every 5 years and enlarged as needed.Enlarged
by 10% since 1998.
-
- Easy to understand.Clear link between purpose and means.
-
- Metro administration firm and flexible
-
- Coupled with infill and redevelopment incentives
-
- Otherwise, little social engineering
14. 6. Public-Private Partnerships:Times Square (1977+) and
Battery Park City (1980+)
- TIMES SQUARE:Re-invented in early 1990s as family entertainment
destination zone coupling theatres, movies, retailing, food &
neon. Now #1 attraction in NYC.
- BATTERY PARK CITY: Largest, densest, and most urban new
community anywhere in US. Couples offices, residential, and
neighborhood commercial and public uses.
-
- Both developed thru sophisticated public-private partnerships
coupling private equity and public debt.
-
- Multiple false starts.Require public development programs and
real estate/financial markets to be in synch.
-
- Built on programmatic flexibility and public-private
professionalism.
15. 7. Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (1986)
- Allows affordable housing developers (chiefly non-profits) to
sell tax credits to companies and investors in exchange for upfront
cash up to 50% of total development cost.Funds rental housing
construction affordable to families with 50% or less of area median
income.In Philadelphia, thats $36,000 for a family of four.
- More than 2M affordable units built since 1986.
- Annual allocation limited to $1.75 per capita, awarded by state
housing finance agencies.
-
- Nicer than your house: Competitionrewards high-quality
development.
-
- Transparent but not easy.
16. 8. Historic Preservation Tax Credit
- Developers who rehabilitate an historic property (listed on the
National Register) may claim a 20% tax credit against their
rehabilitation costs.
- Developers who rehabilitate any non-residential structure built
prior to 1936 mayclaim a 10% tax credit against their
rehabilitation costs.
- Used to rehabilitate more than 35,000 properties since 1976,
generating $45M of new investment.
-
- Works thru tax code to create real value.
-
- Easy to apply to qualified properties.
-
- Administered through appropriate state agencies.
Amsterdam Theatre, NYC 17. 9. The New Urbanist Communities
- Principles : P romote walkability and reduce car use through a
tight grid-like street pattern and mix of housing and land use
types; use design themes to define walkable neighborhoods; create a
recognizable community center for commerce and social interaction;
limit sprawl at the communitys edge.
- More than 100 new urbanist communities built around the world,
mostly in the US and Australia.
-
- Lead the market, dont follow.
-
- Good street and site plans that work.
Kentlands, MD Celebration, FL Greenbank, AU 18. 10. Downtown
Ballparks (1992)
- New/old and retro parks designed exclusively for baseball; less
seating, smaller footprint, and less parking add to the experience
and make downtown or near-downtown location possible. Same factors
allow parks to be integrated into neighborhoods.
- 16 finished so far, 2 in 2009.
- Much more expensive to build than multi-use stadiums; most
require considerable public financing.
-
- Not necessarily a good financial or economic development
investment.
-
- But, can and do catalyze neighborhood residential and
commercial development:Examples : Coors Field in Denver, AT&T
Park in SF, Petco Field in San Diego.
PNC Park Cleveland 19. 11. Local Land Trusts
- Private protection of undeveloped land through conservation
easements, pro-active conveyance to government entity, and
fee-simple ownership.
- As of 2005, more than 1,650 local land trusts protecting 12M
acres.
- Predominantly used to protect working landscapes: wetlands,
river corridors, watersheds, farm and ranch lands.
-
- Works by providing bottom-up common benefit.
-
- More durable than alternatives, especially zoning.
-
- Funds can be set aside for management.
Yolo County, CA 20. 12. Millennium Park (2005)
- Just 24.5 acres in size, built on top of 19 thC railyard.
- Programmed for maximum urban/green experience.
- Iconic features and structures.
- Historical location on Michigan Avenue.
- Substantial private funding & sponsorship.
-
- Single client: Mayor Daley
-
- Brilliant space programming
-
- Intended as amenity for nearby residential towers, as well as
for tourists & downtown workers.
21. Ingredients for Success
- Couple Early Success with Long View Benefits
- Clear & Transparent Goals coupled with Adaptable Approaches
and Strategies
- Broad and Measurable Public Benefits
- Beyond Local Projects:Building Local Capacity to Keep
Going
- Politically Savvy Planners who have Earned the Trust ofLocal
Leaders.
22. Institutionalizing Success
-
- Study planning successesand failuresin planning school.
-
- Goals must be matched by objectives and hard success
criteria.
-
- All planning interventions should include and fund evaluations
as SOP.
-
- All long-term planning interventions should include formal
milepost assessments.
-
-
- Large-scale interventions subject to some form ofex
anteevaluation or benefit-cost Analysis
-
-
- Separate local advance planning functions from permitting and
relocate them to local city/county executive function.