Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space

"A community’s physical form, rather than its land uses, is its most intrinsic and enduring characteristic." [Katz, EPA] This blog focuses on place and placemaking and all that makes it work--historic preservation, urban design, transportation, asset-based community development, arts & cultural development, commercial district revitalization, tourism & destination development, and quality of life advocacy--along with doses of civic engagement and good governance watchdogging.

Sunday, February 02, 2020

University of Maryland proposes a "socially conscious" real estate program

According to The Diamondback, the student newspaper ("A proposed UMD real estate major aims for a socially conscious approach to development"). From the article:
Most real estate development education is focused just on the business, finance and investment side, and when one gets out into the industry, one finds that there’s really a lot more to real estate than just the finance part,” said Donald Linebaugh, interim dean of the architecture, planning and preservation school.

To address real estate’s many disciplines, students within the major must take nine elective credits unrelated to finance. The courses will cover a variety of subjects, including politics, communication and public policy.

Students will graduate with an understanding of historic preservation and urban planning — two areas that can clash with real estate development in large cities like Washington, D.C., Linebaugh said.

Teaching students to consider the impact of development at the community level, Linebaugh said, would help ease tensions between developers and urban planners. In addition, he said the approach would fulfill the school’s “quadruple bottom line”: building developments that are well-financed, socially and environmentally responsible and artfully designed.

“To be done in a way that improves communities, that makes better places,” Linebaugh said, “real estate really needs to be an integrated practice.”
Good luck.

cf. "The Need for Alternatives to the Nineteen Standard Real Estate Product Types," Christopher Leinberger, Places Journal 17:2 (2005)

As Leinberger said in an interview:
“Financiers like to finance commodities...”

I joke that the more I learn about real estate development the more I become an intellectual Marxist. But while Marxism, in its focus on "capital" is great at understanding why things work the way they do, it's not so great for coming up with "solutions" in the context of capitalism.

A socially responsible real estate degree might include a couple of classes and more case studies on social housing, urban revitalization, preservation tax credits, and on housing in Singapore and Vienna, but it's not likely to change the fact that the financing and production system for real estate is global, and that certain neighborhoods, districts, and cities are integrated into that global system, and are impacted in ways that local policy, practice and actors have a difficult time countering.

For example, I just wrote about this in the context of the Parkdale neighborhood of Toronto (""Real estate capital reproduction of space" in the Parkdale neighborhood of Toronto") and LA's Filipinotown ("Historic Filipinotown, Los Angeles, as another example of real estate capital-driven arbitrage") and in the past about DC ("Exogenous market forces impact DC's housing market"), San Francisco ("Applying the super-gentrification thesis to San Francisco, Santa Monica, and other cities experiencing hyper-demand"), and culture spaces ("Dateline Los Angeles: BTMFBA & Transformational Projects Action Planning & arts-related community development corporations as an implementation mechanism to own property") among others.

Also see:

-- "Meet Wall Street's Rent Collector," Wall Street Journal
-- "Centuries-old Grosvenor Group deepens West Coast CRE roots," Real Estate News Exchange
-- "The 19 Building Types That Caused the Recession," CityLab

Labels: , , ,

Friday, November 14, 2014

Livability, global cities and Jan Gehl

I've mentioned Jan Gehl over the years.  He is one of the world's foremost proponents of livability planning  While he's an architect, much of what he and his firm do is master planning, focusing on realizing a city's potential for walking and biking.

Apparently, he spoke earlier in the week in Toronto, so Toronto Star urban design columnist Christopher Hume wrote a piece, "Jan Gehl on making Toronto liveable."

From the article:
Imagine living in a city where pedestrians and cyclists were a priority, where quality of life mattered as much as transit, taxes or economic performance.

In some cities — including many where Jan Gehl has wrought his transformational magic — that’s simply the way it is.

The celebrated Danish architect and public space guru returned to Toronto this week for a series of talks about how to remake cities, including this one, so they can be enjoyed, not just endured.

Turns out — little surprise here — it’s all about data and political will. During the course of his 50-year career, Gehl has made cities from Copenhagen (where he lives) to Melbourne, New York and Christchurch the envy of urban dwellers everywhere.
I have suggested that city livability rankings and working to achieve a listing can be a good way for cities to refocus some of their energies on metrics that make a difference in the quality of life for residents.  I believe that the Economist Intelligence Unit even has a program that it offers that explains their ranking criteria and how cities are measured.

I think of cities like Copenhagen, Amsterdam, and Portland a lot in terms of sustainable transportation achievement, how its done--starting with a "big" vision and followed by a multi-decade commitment and constant assessment and improvement.

When people say to a planner "why can't we be like Portland?" it can be paralyzing, because the person asking the question doesn't realize that Portland of today is the result of more than 40 years of decision-making, policy, and practice, that started off with a contrary vision of tearing down a freeway along the city's waterfront.

(Lots of people) Cycling in Copenhagen.  Wikipedia photo.

Jan Gehl's efforts in Copenhagen started in 1962 and are ongoing even today, and now the city has 55% of its residents biking daily.  From the article:
According to Gehl, the city saves 25 cents for every kilometre a cyclist rides, and loses 17 cents for every kilometre travelled by car.

“When Copenhagen started to pedestrianize its main street in 1962, everyone was exceedingly nervous,” Gehl recalls. “I remember the acidic debate about getting rid of cars. But it worked out beautifully. We narrowed the streets from four lanes to two, added bike lanes and planted trees. Today the city is more beautiful and much safer.”
I think that cost/kilometre number for different types of mobility is an interesting metric that needs to be more widely communicated and understood. Imagine including such information in a city's transportation plan!

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, November 12, 2014

Global cities don't just take, they give

The entry below is a reprint from the Urbanophile blog and not because it starts out by mentioning me.

Given that we've just had an election in Washington, DC with the victory by Muriel Bowser, who is now one of only three women mayors of large US cities ("Muriel Bowser win makes D.C. biggest U.S. city with women in 3 top jobs," Washington Times), recently in Toronto, where John Tory is now mayor and should help to bring some stability to municipal politics and governance there, and the municipal election is this upcoming Saturday in Vancouver, BC ("Vancouver's election just got interesting," Toronto Globe & Mail), where the momentum is now favoring the challenger, it's worth thinking about this broad question of what is a global city, how do leaders in global cities act, and how do they make their own city better while simultaneously contributing to the art and practice of city making.

(Note that in Canada, Calgary's mayor, Naheed Nenshi, is considered amongst the best and most impressive in North America.  See "Calgary mayor makes us look like rednecks" and 'Canada's mayor' sees the city positively" from the Toronto Star.)

On this broad note, last year the Boston Globe ran an interesting series of articles about exemplary actions in particular areas by other cities, as a kind of advice for incoming Mayor, Martin Walsh.

-- Greg Cook: Learn from how Chicago does culture 
-- Melissa Massello: Gen Xers can live larger in Lone Star State
-- Dante Ramos: Six ideas Boston should emulate
-- Edward L. Glaeser:> What Greater Boston can teach the rest of the world<

More recently, the Toronto Globe & Mail has an article about the High Line and its lessons, "The High Line effect: Why cities around the world (including Toronto) are building parks in the sky," while a piece in the Sacramento Bee about public art, "Sacramento airport's big red rabbit means business – really," mentions a piece by Blair Kamin in the Chicago Tribune, "Millennium Park: 10 years old and a boon for art, commerce and the cityscape," about Millennium Park and its social and economic impact. The economic impact numbers come from a study by Texas A&M< and DePaul University.
------------
Originally published:  April 28th, 2013

I had an interesting conversation about Washington, DC with Richard Layman a few months back. One of his observations, rooted in Charles Landry’s, was that great global cities don’t just take, they give. To the extent that Washington wants to be a truly great city, it needs to contribute things to the world, not just rake in prosperity from it.

Affecting the world, often for good but unfortunately sometimes for bad, is a unique capability that global cities have because they are the culture shaping hubs of nations and world. When an ordinary city does something, it can have an effect to be sure. But things that happen in the global city are much more likely to launch movements.

For example, Chicago did not invent the idea of doing a public art exhibit out of painted cow statues. I believe they copied it from a town in Switzerland. But when Chicago did it, it inspired other cities in a way that Swiss town did not. In effect, ordinary cities influence the world usually by influencing a global city, which then influences the world. Often it is the global city that gets the credit although the actual idea originated elsewhere. Thus the role of the global city is critical. But we shouldn’t assume that all ideas originate there or that other cities can’t profoundly influence the world.

We might also think of bicycle sharing, which was around in various forms for quite a while. But it was the launch of the massive Paris Vélib’ system in 2007 (which according to Wikipedia was inspired by a system in Lyon) that made bicycle sharing a must have urban item the world over.

Similarly it was the High Line in New York that has every city wanting to convert elevated rail lines into showcase trails. New York is really the city that made protected bike lanes the new standard in the United States as well.

Beyond simple urban amenity type items, global cities can also launch profound cultural and social transformations. A few examples.

The first is from Seattle, a sort of semi-global city. It was in such a depressed state in the 1970s that someone put up a billboard that’s still pretty famous: “Will the last one leaving Seattle please turn out the lights?” Yet in Seattle there was a coffeehouse culture that spawned a movement out of which came Starbucks which literally revolutionized coffee drinking in America and event pioneered the entirely new concept of the “third place.”

A lot of people like to attribute the emergence of Seattle as a player to Microsoft moving there from Albuquerque in the late 1970s. However, I think the coffee example shows that there were interesting things already happening in Seattle long before that. It was a proto-global city waiting for a catalyst.

Another example would be the emergence of rap music out of New York City. Or house music from Chicago.

Or consider the 1963 demolition of Penn Station in New York in 1963. The wanton destruction of this signature structure horrified the city and led to the adoption of its historic preservation ordinance. This was not the birthplace of historic preservation in the United States, but this demolition played a key role in bringing historic preservation to the fore, not just locally but nationally.

Lastly, the Stonewall Riots in 1969 clearly played a signature role in the gay rights movement in America. Many pride parades today are scheduled to fall on the anniversary of the event.

Who knows what might have happened with coffee in America without Seattle. But I think it’s clear that both the historic preservation and gay rights movements would have emerged at some point anyway regardless of what happened in New York. However, the events in New York clearly provided a sort of ignition and acceleration.

How many historic buildings in America were saved because Penn Station was lost? (Think about how many might have been destroyed had the historic preservation movement emerged later).

Think about a state like Iowa where gay marriage is legal. How many people in Iowa 40+ years ago had any idea that an obscure incident in New York City would ultimately transform the social conventions of the rural heartland?

I think this shows the power of the global city. I’m sure that there are things happening underground in New York and elsewhere that right now that we don’t know anything about yet that will ultimately transform our world 10, 20, or 30 years down the road. It’s crazy to think about.

------- end of Urbanophile entry -------

p.336.  (italics in the original)

To be a 'creative city for the world' or to be 'creative for your city' highlights how a city can (or should) project a value base or an ethical foundation in encouraging its citizens, businesses, and public institutions to act.  By acting in this manner the way a city operates and the results it achieves act as role models to inspire others. .....

Creativity for the world or for your city gives something back; it is a creativity that generates civic values and civility.

Labels: , , , , ,