[Jay Everett]

I really really really like this. I’m eager to see if it will be a success.

[Jay Everett]

I’m often frustrated by the dialog around infrastructure here’s a small example:

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2011/apr/22/alexander-suggests-higher-gas-tax/

To tax or not to tax?…that is the wrong question. No where in the above article does it mention the real problems with the gas tax. The problem is the gas tax is a consumption tax that is levied per gallon of gas rather than per mile traveled and it is not indexed to inflation. Inflation has increased while the tax has stayed the same, meanwhile cars have continued to increase in fuel economy. As a result of these two facts we pay less and less each year per mile traveled resulting in more wear-and-tear on our roads, but less money to repair them. The Congressional Budget Office has said that as early as 2012 the Highway Trust Fund could be insolvent. It’s a shame it takes a crisis for us to give the partisan talking points a rest and have a real conversation about how we finance, deliver, operate, and maintain our infrastructure.

 

We should ask ourselves are there better alternatives to the gas tax? What would be fair and cover the actual costs? Do we really need to construct more highways when we can’t afford to maintain the ones we have? Are there other transportation investments that would make more sense? As it is now over half the money for roads and highway construction come from other sources: ie: other taxes.

[Jay Everett]

I would think it would be a long time before you could pay off that kind of debt. You will probably be making maybe 5-8 thousand dollars more than someone with a BLA when you get out, depending on where you are in the country it could be low 40Ks to mid 50Ks. Most senior landscape architects don’t make over 85K a year.

 

If those are your only 3 choices, City College is the way to go. Tuition costs have gotten completely out of hand, but thats another topic all together…

[Jay Everett]

Jessi,

If you are still open to other options, maybe look into an MBA with a focus in sustainability. That will substantially increase the range of jobs availbile to you when you get out of school, some firms might find an MBA more attractive than an MLA. I don’t feel like we gain much understanding of the economic side of sustainability in design school, and it’s just as important as the social and environmental aspects.

 

A word of warning: if you get too far away from design curriculum, you may have to take some leveling classes. I also have a BLA and I’m currently on undergrad leveling class #5 of 7 and plan to start the Green MBA in the fall of this year. On the other hand if you’re taking a year to figure things out it might be worth experimenting by taking a course or two in business or some other field like biology or geology just to try out something different. I agree with Marie, be aware of the job opportunities before you choose a master’s program.

[Jay Everett]

yes

[Jay Everett]

Thanks Nick,
Yes, the DPZ transect from their smartcode is an example of applying form based codes to land use types ranging from intensely urban to conservation/wild-land areas.(the areas they refer to as T1 through T3)

photo credit duany plater-zyberk & co.

However, I do recognize that this is a template, not the code for a specific community. Does anyone know of an example/case study where form based codes have worked well in lower density situations?

[Jay Everett]

Very well, I apologize. It certainly was never my intention to offend anyone, and I feel we have gotten off-topic. When I began this discussion it was not for the purpose of critiquing either the profession of planning or landscape architecture, it was to discuss the future of conventional zoning in light of new trends in land use regulations.

I think it is clear that we each feel passionately about our own point of view on the future of land use regulations. And I think this conversation is an important one and I hope we can continue it in a constructive fashion.

I recently came across this graphic which I think accurately depicts the shortcomings of conventional zoning and design guidelines while showing how form based codes can better ensure quality outcomes from development. While I agree that form based codes are more useful in urban situations, I would contend that they are easily applicable to suburban and rural situations. Could you elaborate further on why they wouldn’t work for single family residential areas?

[Jay Everett]

To clarify, I would never call anyone else’s work junk. The “junk” I’m referring to are the annoying phone calls and emails that planners have to field every day from people who have trouble interpreting regulations.

[Jay Everett]

nrschmid,

I can’t speak for Daniel, but I can give an example and a quote from a recent article in Nashville’s City Paper that I think might illustrate his point ( quick fact: Nashville is currently about 2 months away from a Planning Commission vote to take action on a new form-based code for its downtown):

An analysis by Metro Planning shows 37 percent of the lots in downtown are vacant and only 6 percent have buildings with five or more stories, a very low number for a city of Nashville’s size.

“When you compare what has happened in other core cities, we have not developed as rapidly as they have,” Planning Department Executive Director Rick Bernhardt told The City Paper. “I think [the existing] code has been an impediment.”
source

I think the widespread adoption of form based codes is a good thing for planners. The idea is that you, as a planner, conduct public input meetings and develop a community vision for future development. Then you codify those desires into a form based code. The result is a code that is much more user friendly and it streamlines the approval process so that developments consistent with the community vision can be built by right.

That’s got to be more fun than the junk planners currently have to put up with. Wouldn’t you rather spend more time conducting charrettes and generating graphics to illustrate the vision?

And if the designers and developers complain, I know you’re going to enjoy saying “We gave you pictures, what more do you need?”

I have to give some major props to our local planners, the draft of Nashville’s DTC is a very attractive and easy to use document. So easy an LA can understand it.

Nashville DTC Website
proposed Nashville DTC

[Jay Everett]

I definitely respect your views and agree that people should not be forced to change their lifestyles. However, I really don’t think thats what we are talking about. I think what we are proposing is giving people more choices, not limiting them. More importantly we (advocates for “smart growth”) are saying that America needs to begin positioning itself for a new economy, one in which it is not dependent on petroleum for transportation. Transit oriented development in my opinion, is the best way to do that and it doesn’t require any major technological innovations.

A key point in this conversation is the concept of “Peak Oil” which is a short way of referring to the point at which global oil production peaks and oil becomes scarcer and more expensive to find and extract. No one disputes that there will come a point when global oil production will peak, the tricky thing is that no one can really know when it will happen…until after it happens.

Most of our transportation system in the US is dependent on products derived from petroleum, from the gas in the tank, to the plastic dash board, from the tires on the cars to the asphalt pavement, all are or contain petroleum products. Why would we want to go through the growing pains that would result if oil production suddenly begins to decline while global oil demand continues to increase? In this case, waiting for a market response will be much more expensive, and much more painful.

An additional related point is that oil is one of our most precious resources. Many conveniences of modern life and advances in modern medicine are attributable to technological leaps in the field of plastics and polymers. We can do so much with oil, we can use it in plastic products and then reuse it or recycle it. Considering all the opportunities petroleum provides us burning it to release its energy seems to be the least intelligent option. Why not preempt the results of peak oil and begin conserving our reserves so that oil can be used in a more sustainable way? There are those of us who don’t want to wait on the market. If we wait for peak oil to begin building the kind of multi-modal transportation infrastructure that is economically viable in the long term then we will be in a world of hurt.

But you’re probably right, it will probably happen the way you see it. More than likely America will wait for peak oil to get serious about smart growth. Given our recent track record it seems we have a habit of allowing our problems to compound on each other in a way that pushes our systems to the point of collapse and THEN we form a coalition to agree to work together to fix the problems. I have hope that this can be different. I believe there are market-based ways to avoid being prepared for peak oil.

[Jay Everett]

Very good points Andrew,

Like many things in life the difficulty here is that we have finite resources and a long list of priorities, the question becomes what is the highest and best use the resources that we have?

I’m interested by the way the word “subsidized” is used in discussions on public transit. The majority of highways and roads are built and maintained with Federal, State, and Local tax dollars. Isn’t this “subsidizing” a transportation system? You could argue that the taxes generated by the economic development that result along these corridors pay for the system, but the same arguments can be made for alternative forms of transportation.

Also a key component that is often left out of the transit debate is safety. Automobile accident-related injuries and fatalities have become so commonplace in our culture that we just accept them as a part of American life. These have to be included in the equation along with infrastructure, maintenance , and private car ownership costs if you want to talk about the price we pay for the autonomy that our cars give us. Although I would further suggest that you can have even greater freedom to move about and autonomy in cities that have invested in high quality, high functioning, multi-modal transportation systems.

Truthfully it does take a large and constant expenditure of funds to build a quality multi-modal transportation system, people who will tell you it can be done on the cheap are lying. I’m talking about one that works. You are right that many of the bus systems we currently have ARE a waste of money, because as you pointed out, they do not have sufficient ridership. This is mainly because of a stigma attached to buses, and unreliable service because the buses are not separated from the automotive traffic.

To clarify, I’m not suggesting public transit systems be built to service rural, or low-density areas as they exist today. But what I will suggest is that quality transit systems can and DO attract development to areas where it makes sense to increase the density. A marvelous case study of this phenomenon is Denver Colorado’s transit system where according to the Transit-Oriented Development Status Report 2008:

Combining the data for the existing RTD system and planned FasTracks stations, 14,608
housing units, 4,726 hotel rooms, 5.2 million square feet of retail, 5.6 million square feet
of office space, 1.8 million square feet of government space, 160,000 square feet of cul-
tural space, 4.6 million square feet of medical-related space, and 2.62 million square feet
of convention/sports space have either been built or are currently under construction. This
represents a net increase in 1,144 housing units, 997 hotel rooms, and 1.2 million square
feet of office space since 2007.

So sometimes if you build it, they will come. But you’re right the belief in that doesn’t make it work, it takes research, planning and INVESTMENT. That is where I think we probably wont agree. I believe that the way we are currently spending (especially federal) tax dollars to build more and expand existing highways is unsustainable. I did not come to this conclusion overnight, and it is not motivated by an ideology, it is purely pragmatic.

According to the ASCE we have done a very poor job maintaining the infrastructure that we have and it is almost all automobile dependent. We need to focus on repairing the critical infrastructure that exists and focus new spending on capitol projects that are not auto-centric.

[Jay Everett]

I took Mike’s 2-week workshop a few years ago in Kansas. I think the one-week workshop probably covers all of the critical techniques in Mike’s system (like the first week in Kansas) but you probably miss out of the repetition and practice that the second week afforded participants. My understanding from hearing Mike speak back then was that it was difficult to make the economics work out for most people, even with a group rate at an economy hotel chain it would be TOO expensive for most people to pay for the workshop AND pay to stay in San Francisco for 2 weeks.

If you’re serious about learning from the BEST architectural graphics teacher in the country the YES, take the class. But consider this fair warning: EXPECT to be challenged, and DON’T expect it to be a vacation.

[Jay Everett]

Nick,

I think optimism is a powerful ally. There will probably be lots of opportunities for people who are able to hang on through the recession. Personally I think there was already a shortage of “Gen-X”, people roughly between the age of 30 and 45, in the industry before the recession. Graduation rates for LA’s have been much higher in recent years but I’ve witnessed many people leaving the industry for various reasons even before the economic downturn.
The boomers are retiring and they are taking their professional network connections with them. And as Brian pointed out in the case of EDAW, in many cases there just aren’t enough people within the existing organizations with enough assets to “buy-out” the old guys.

I recently witnessed a microcosm of this phenomenon at the firm I currently work for. The man who started the firm was ready to retire 5 or 6 years ago, but he just kept working because apparently an agreement couldn’t be reached. It took the existing Jr. partner plus 3 additional senior principals at the firm to come together and buy out one senior partner. All the guys who are now partners are in their mid to late 40’s or Early 50’s. It’s not just economics and credit that complicate things, there’s also the personality issues that go into the equation, you have to ask yourself “Do I really want to take on this much risk collectively with THESE other people…”

I guess what I’m saying is that I agree with you, the population is going to continue to increase and so that will dictate that there needs to be more housing, infrastructure, places of business and recreation constructed. And you’re right SOMEONE has to design that stuff. The people who will be in a position to do that work are the people who are committed to sticking with this profession through the tough times.

It was eye-opening and encouraging to me to learn about Michael Van Valkenburgh’s early career experiences in an OP-ED he wrote in the MAY ’09 issue of LAM.

Stick it out folks, even if you do have to “practice” on someone’s backyard. Many of my friends who have been laid-off are doing just that, residential design-build just so they can stay in the game. These are the people who will be in a position to capitalize on the opportunities that a recovering economy will bring.

[Jay Everett]

There was a similar discussion in the professional practice forum several months ago, the big point is the one James made: it’s a pretty good deal if you need licensure in multiple states. I have also heard that if you let it lapse and then 8 years down the road decide to renew it you will have to pay the back-fees for those in between years. I’m not sure how long they will keep your records on file after you let it lapse…

[Jay Everett]

I agree with Mike that it is useful to have a system like SSI so that you can certify a sustainible project that might not even have a building like an arboretum or interpretive heritage site.

I also agree with Paul that the base-line case is not ideal and that systems that award ratings based on performance are better. I believe LEED EB is currently the only category that requires “recertification” all others are basically a one time event that may involve some post occupancy reporting but even that doesn’t get out much further than a year from occupancy. I like the point he made about checking on the landscape manager’s clock settings for the irrigation system.

Chris, open source is a great idea, I wonder about how to foster widespread adoption though. I’m not aware of too many situations were open source products have become industry standards or for lack of a better term commercially viable. I realize thats probably a bad way of putting it since the point would not be to make money, I’m really just referring to commercial success as it relates to distribution and use.

[Author]

Posts