Urban Humanism: exploring concepts of sustainable architecture - RESTORING THE MAIN STREET

For hundreds of years the main street was the center of every town's activity. It was a place where people lived, worked, shopped and conducted business. The typical development pattern included multi-story buildings with residential units on upper levels and commercial spaces on the main floor. People lived close to where they worked. A butcher, a baker, a doctor, and a merchant lived upstairs from their shop and their customers were their neighbors. The street was the center of vibrant activity. People walked and socialized, children played and the community life flourished.

The last half of the century changed the way we live. The industrial age brought with it the separation of life and work. Residential subdivisions become separated from the workplace and entertainment and social life was "zoned" elsewhere. At the same time the popularity and increased affordability of a private car made it possible to drive everywhere. The lack of investments, and in particular, the dismantling of the public transit systems, soon turned a car into a necessity.

The development patterns had to change to accommodate our car-centered lifestyle. And with that the main street had to transform. The historic streets that catered to pedestrians had to follow the car-oriented development patterns. Streets got widened and the sidewalks narrowed, trees cut down to make room for additional lanes of traffic. Multistory mixed use dense development gave way to drive-thru restaurants, banks, pharmacies. Large parking lots in front of the buildings and billboards took over our urban landscape.

The historic main street transformed beyond recognition in last 65 years but current discussions about sustainability and the energy crisis leads us to the need to reduce our dependency on driving and restoring the concept of the main street. Zoning codes are changing to make mixed-use, high-density developments possible again. And communities all over the country demand more walkable neighborhoods.

People want to bring back the pedestrian-oriented development to their communities. They want to be able to walk to a coffee shop to meet with their neighbors and would like to be able to buy milk and organic groceries in their corner store. In my own 'back yard' volunteers discuss streetscape amenities and apply for grants to promote wellness through increased safety and improved pedestrian environment on Federal Blvd.

As our country emerges from The Great Recession the construction industry will have to adapt to new market demands. One by one drive-thru's will transform into storefronts filled with locally owned restaurants, coffee shops and retail. Mixed-income housing on the levels above will provide customers to those businesses. As an architect I see tremendous opportunities as well as responsibilities for our profession. Architects will have an obligation to serve their communities by providing "People Oriented Development" advocacy and design. This may mean that we will have to come out from behind our desks and actively participate in the development process. There is so much potential and work that needs to be done in order to restore the main street in our communities.

Urban Humanism exploring concepts of sustainable architecture

URBAN INFILL

In my last post I provided a board overview of how, in my opinion, the future of architecture and sustainable development will look like. The impact of the Great Recession will cause us to re-think how architecture responds to social and economic needs in addition to employing building materials and technologies that reduce negative impact that development has on the environment.

Today I would like to focus on one of the very first questions asked during the development process – WHERE to build. In the past decades the answer to that question often was – anywhere, as long as the land is cheap. We are now learning that we no longer can afford ‘cheap’. And the cheap that we already have will be very expensive to maintain and fix.

There have been many articles and books written about irresponsible development practices that lead to sprawl. Some call them ‘the biggest misallocation of resources’ others talk about ‘retrofitting suburbia’. One thing we can all agree on is that in the coming decades we will not see much of ‘cul-de-sac’ developments and business parks build on virgin or farm land.

At the same time the demographers are telling us that the trend of people moving to the large cities will continue and possibly accelerate leading to 80% of the population living in urban areas by the year 2050. And so the growth of metropolitan cities is the reality that needs to be addressed. What kind of development will accommodate this growth without continuing the mistakes that we have made in the past?

The only responsible alternative to sprawling developments is urban infill. The benefits of developing within existing urban fabric are numerous and so are the opportunities. There is land that is undeveloped such as public right of ways (that have previously been preserved for possible roadway construction) and old industrial properties as well as underdeveloped residential properties that can accommodate multifamily housing. We can already see eyes of developers turning towards these options.

Environmental benefits of urban infill are obvious and can be summarized in one simple statement – it prevents sprawl. Compact development reduces the need for driving and thus improves air quality. It also promotes the use of public transit even further diminishing the use of private vehicles. It preserves natural land and wildlife habitat as well as natural resources.

There are also social benefits of urban infill. People who live in compact developments are more likely to walk or bike as a daily means of transportation and therefore they are healthier. New development near urban core attracts new population to aging neighborhoods and improves quality of schools and vitality of community life. Compact developments allow for more diversity of housing choices allowing integration of different population groups (seniors, low income families, first time homebuyers, renters and market rate buyers) into vibrant communities. Mixed use urban infill developments often act as catalysts for community life and social interaction.

And as we all deal with impacts the Great Recession has on our lives it is impossible not to mention economic benefits of urban infill. Development within existing urban fabric utilizes existing public infrastructure (roads, water and sewer lines, power lines etc.) as well as public services (trash removal, snow removal, mail delivery etc). When local municipalities struggle to balance their budget keeping infrastructure and services costs down is critical.

Compact development also supports local small businesses. We all want to see local business owners to continue to be the engine of our economy. But corner stores and ‘mom-and-pop’ establishments located in older neighborhoods struggle as the population in these areas ages and decreases. Their business model based on friendly customer service cannot withstand competition of large retailers and chain restaurants that are based on high volume of sales. Urban infill brings in much needed customers for local businesses and thus supports local economy.

In the coming decades continued migration to metropolitan areas and diminishing natural resources will force us to rethink development. We will also have to change the way we think about housing and transit. All those changes will lead to creative and sustainable use of land called urban infill.

Urban Humanism

Last week I attended a presentation by a representative from Regional Transportation District on FasTracks. Somebody commented how surprised they were in 2004 to discover that women over 65 voted FOR the tax increase to support construction of the new transit system. The surprise came from the fact that this population group lives on the fixed income and is historically unlikely to support new and progressive project. It was an evening of surprises as I found that comment striking. More on that later…

During last 50 years city planning revolved around cars. Large city blocks allowing for long acceleration and deceleration lanes, multi-lane streets, highways, drive-thru restaurants, banks, pharmacies and lots and lots of parking (4 parking spaces for every car on the road today!). Because of the way zoning codes are written today it is standard procedure for an architect or engineer to start designing a site plan by determining parking requirements. Then we look at setbacks; finally the little space left is used for the building. Little or no consideration is given to pedestrians. Our cities are designed for the cars, not for the people.

In the recent years we came to realization that car-centered city planning leads to catastrophic consequences. I will not get into the discussion of energy crisis or environmental implications. I want to focus on social outcome instead.

For thousands of years people walked or rode their horses. The size of their world was limited by how far they can walk in one day. If they needed information they asked their neighbors. A corner store carried all basic goods and was within walking distance. So were the school, the church and the doctor. A street car would take you to the downtown. There were no gyms and no obesity. There was a lot of neighborhood gossip but no social anxiety or depression. Active children were told to play outside, not medicated for ADHD.

Progressive minds of today talk about new ways to create modern, sustainable developments. New urbanism, new communities… I want to go back to those little old ladies over the age of 65 who voted for FasTracks in 2004. I’m not surprised by their vote at all! They remember the days before cars took over our lifestyle. For them there is nothing new or progressive about public transportation or livable and walk-able communities.

Many cities (including Denver) adopt new kind of zoning codes. The Form Based Codes. Unfortunately the word Form relates to the Building Form. I’m still waiting for yet another generation of codes: Human Form Based Codes. City planning based on human scale and human perception. City planning that considers questions like these:

• Can a mother with three children safely walk on this sidewalk? (note she only has two hands)
• Would you let your 8-year-old son ride a bike on this bike trail independently?
• Can children walk or bike to school in this neighborhood?
• Can a 65-year-old woman walk or take a local bus to the light rail stop?
• Where do you get your milk?
• Can you live in this neighborhood for a week without driving?

One-size-fits-all

We have all heard the criticism for the old zoning code in Denver that it was “one-size-fits-all” approach. Particularly negative review received residential zone R2 that allowed single and two-family dwellings as well as row houses. The new code promised a diverse approach, one that will consider all the nuances and unique qualities of different parts of town and specially focus on the diversity in urban neighborhoods. That was an ambitious plan requiring an extensive study of existing inventory and lots of intricate planning to accommodate the variety of forms and patterns.

Today, as I look at the Fourth and Final draft of the zoning code I can’t help but be disappointed. The majority of urban neighborhoods are light yellow indicating a SU (Single Unit) zone designation. It seems like we have a new size to fit all our needs again. The first and obvious problem here is that we have missed the opportunity to recognize formal diversity of our urban heritage. The even bigger problem is that the new size is smaller than the old one.

Our population is growing and so is the City of Denver. The new smaller size will not fit (accommodate) all. As a matter of fact the new zoning will allow for very little growth in already established urban neighborhoods. The consequences can be pretty nasty. We will see excess spilling over the edges. In the fashion world we lovingly call it “love handles”. In the city planning jargon the name is “urban sprawl”.

So after five years and millions of dollars that Denver spent to develop this new code, if we have to (again) settle for one size to fit all, can we at least allow for some room to grow?

Historic Preservation and Urban Density

Things got confused very early on. Somebody said: Those multi-family developments destroy character of historic neighborhoods. Developers scrape old homes to erect duplexes. We need to stop multiplex developments to preserve urban communities. Somebody said: Density is the enemy of our lifestyle. And others nodded in agreement.

Things got confused because what we are discussing here are two separate issues: historic preservation and density. Historic preservation makes a distinction between structures that are historically significant and need to be preserved and the ones that have outlived their utilitarian lifespan and should be replaced with new buildings. Density adds value to the urban lifestyle by creating walkable communities supported by public transportation.

The two issues are separate but not mutually exclusive. We need both historic preservation and density to ensure health of our neighborhoods. Limiting density will not protect historic homes. We can’t treat a headache by putting both legs in a cast.

Social Aspect of City Planning

This is the edited version of an earlier post.

I will start on a personal note. I was born and grew up in Krakow, Poland. This historic city in central Europe shaped my understanding of what a city is and how it works. During my high school and collage years my daily routine consisted of 30 minute bus and light rail trip to the downtown. Waiting at the local bus stop was an opportunity to chat with the neighbors about the latest score of the town’s soccer team. There was always a group of friends on a light rail ready to discuss homework problems and share the gossip. Public transportation was so common and available I never learned how to drive, but instead I have always felt like a part of the community I lived in. After school, on a nice day, I would stroll through the city’s main square. There never was an instance that I did not run into an old friend or acquaintance.

When I first moved to the US I first lived in Knoxville, TN for a while. Inadequate city planning allowed that town to stretch along I-40 in a completely uncontrolled manner. The city’s downtown (located on the East end of the stretch) was neglected and forgotten while all development rushed to the West (hoping one day to reach Nashville?). The lack of a street grid forced all traffic onto the highway turning my 5 mile daily commute into a 45 minutes nightmare. Forced into a car, stuck in traffic I missed human interaction and grew frustrated.

After Knoxville Denver was like a breath of fresh air. The city has all the “good bones” of a perfect place to live. Well defined, vibrant downtown surrounded by beautiful historic residential neighborhoods, grid of streets and arterial transportation. With the right city planning and development of public transportation Denver has a potential to surpass San Francisco, Portland and Boston in terms of quality of life.

It is important to note that a city is more than just a collection of streets and buildings. Just like Jane Jacobs says, in “Death and Life of Great American Cities”, cities are compilation of social experiences. As human beings there is nothing more interesting to us than watching other human beings. And when the times are rough we long for closeness and interaction with family members, friends and neighbors.

The economy of the last few years has forced us to refocus our lifestyle. More and more people talk about going back to basics and recognize family and social values. The wave of foreclosures redefined housing market. Home buyers are asking for quality, efficiency and simplicity, not the square footage. Kitchen tables re-gained their popularity as people stay in and cook more. Neighborhood schools are important centers of community life. And everybody is tired of highway traffic.

City planning is a powerful tool in the hands of politicians. It can shape a city by shifting development opportunities from one end to the other like a kid playing in the sand with a shovel. It can also promote or discourage human interaction. It can allow us to walk to a corner store and mingle on a light rail or force us into our cars for hours at a time. During these times of “CHANGE” and shift in social priorities we came to a point when we should stop designing our cities for the cars and focus on people instead.

The big WHY of 2009

This post is personal. It talks about WHY, in 2009, I spent so much energy and time on the subject of city planning. Why I had no choice but to step out of my comfort zone and (with the shaky voice) speak at the public hearing. And why I felt obligated to write a letter to the City Council.

I was born and grew up in Krakow, Poland. This historic city in central Europe shaped my understanding of what a city is and how it works. During my high school and collage years my daily routine consisted of 30 minute bus and light rail trip to the downtown. Waiting at the local bus stop was an opportunity to chat with the neighbors about the latest score of the town’s soccer team. There was always a group of friends on a light rail ready to discuss homework problems and share the gossip. Public transportation was so common and available I never learned how to drive, but instead I have always felt like a part of the community I lived in. After school, on a nice day, I would stroll through the city’s main square. There never was an instance that I did not run into an old friend or acquaintance. Like that grade school math teacher who insisted on calling me “Ania”. He was glad to see his favorite pupil about to graduate from an architecture school. After a full day I would go back to my family’s 500-square-foot apartment where we sat at the kitchen table at 7 pm every night for supper. I would listen to my parent’s conversations about Lech Walesa and Solidarity movement and learnt about the important changes happening in world’s politics during that time.

It is important to note that a city is more than just a collection of streets and buildings. Just like Jane Jacobs says cities are compilation of social experiences. As human beings there is nothing more interesting to us than watching other human beings. And when the times are rough we long for closeness and interaction with family members, friends and neighbors. For me, those were some fundamental, simple lessons I learnt while growing up in Poland. After studding urban design and architecture in collage, travelling to different cities in Europe, and finally settling in US (my first stop was Knoxville, TN) those lessons turned into a passion for quality of urban lifestyle. And while Denver is gearing up to adopt a new zoning code early next year I felt obligated to speak up on behalf of a simple human right to be around other humans.

The economy of the last few years has forced us to refocus our lifestyle. More and more people talk about going back to basics and recognize family and social values. The wave of foreclosures redefined housing market. Home buyers are asking for quality, efficiency and simplicity, not the square footage. Kitchen tables re-gained their popularity as people stay in and cook more. Neighborhood schools are important centers of community life. And everybody is tired of highway traffic.

City planning is a powerful tool in the hands of politicians. It can shape a city by shifting development opportunities from one end to the other like a kid playing in the sand with a shovel. It can also promote or discourage human interaction. It can allow us to walk to a corner store and mingle on a light rail or force us into our cars for hours at a time. During these times of “CHANGE” and shift in social priorities we came to a point when we should stop designing our cities for the cars and focus on the people instead.


Wishing you a meaningful 2010,

Gosia Kung

Picture of a house by Julia, 4 1/2

Architects for Responsible Growth

December 10, 2009


Council Members
City of Denver, Colorado


RE: Denver New Zoning Code


Dear Council Person,
We are a group of architects who practice in Denver. We have no formal organization, what brings us together is a shared vision for the future of our City. We believe that through responsible planning and zoning Denver can become a model sustainable community that many will follow. Vibrant neighborhoods, healthy urban lifestyle, walking, biking, public transportation, good schools and public safety all depend on the right mix of uses and appropriate density.

We are deeply concerned with the down zoning of 70% of urban neighborhoods currently zoned R2 to a Single Unit designation. In order to promote sustainable growth of Denver we should allow incremental increase of density in urban neighborhoods. In our opinion all areas currently zoned R2 should allow, at minimum, Two Unit developments. There are four basic types of Two Unit developments: the main house with accessory dwelling unit, top-and-bottom duplex, front-to-back and a side-by-side duplex. All four forms are historically present in our neighborhoods and hold tremendous potential in terms of affordable and environmentally responsible housing. We also support increased density zoning (allowing townhouses, multi-story condominiums and apartment buildings) in the areas adjacent to public transit.

Stability can only be achieved through responsible and sustainable growth. In order to preserve urban fabric of our historic neighborhoods it has to be continuously repaired and updated; without the maintenance colors will fade and the fabric will deteriorate. It is also important to preserve the economic value and land entitlements that the property owners have reasonably expected to see. Maintaining and encouraging development potential is crucial component of supporting growing economy.

Increased urban density and transit oriented communities are the future of city planning. We cannot afford to continue and actually increase the un-sustainable low-density single family pattern of the past. Responsible city planning is critical in terms of reducing our carbon footprint. Increased density in urban neighborhoods has a potential to:

• Allow more residents to move closer to downtown and thus reduce commute, pollution and traffic.
• Promote health by encouraging walking and biking.
• Increased public transit ridership.
• Utilizing existing infrastructure, utilities, roads and public services for new housing and less need for development of virgin land.
• Reduce municipal infrastructure cost.
• Allow options in terms of affordable housing and transportation.
• Improve performance of local schools.
• Reduce sprawl and increase quality of life.

We are grateful and honored to be a part of the process that will shape our City for many decades to come. Denver Zoning Code overhaul brings with it a great potential but also a responsibility. We are asking you not to see the new code as an opportunity to implement shortsighted agendas of the few, but as an obligation to the future generations. Let’s make sure that we are promoting a Sustainable City that our grandchildren will be proud of long after we are gone.


All persons endorsing this letter are architects who completed projects in Denver within last five years.


Gosia Kung, AIA, LEED AP
KUNGarchitecture


Niccolo Casewit, AIA
Environmental Productions


Joseph E. Simmons
BlueSky Studio


Michael Knorr
Michael Knorr & Associates, Inc


Michael Kephart, AIA, NCARB, Certified Green Professional, NAHB, ULI and CAASH.
Kephart Living


Michel Tavel, AIA
Michael Tavel Architects


Richard R Heinemeyer, AIA, LEED AP
CDFM Architectural


Rebecca (Becky) Alexis, AIA
Architect, Residential Contractor, Real Estate Broker with RE/MAX Southeast
HIVE Architecture, LLC


Sean M. O'Hara, AIA, LEED AP
EVstudio


Guy R. Nichols, AIA
Nichols Design Group, PC


Jim Schneck
MasterBuild Architects, Inc.


Gary Taipalus
Executive Director, Rocky Mountain Center for Sustainable Urbanism


Tobias Strohe
JG Johnson Architects


Paul Adams, AIA LEED AP
Earth and Sky Architecture


Dean Foreman, AIA, LEED AP
CARVELL PAGESOUTHERLANDPAGE


Jamie Miller, Assoc. AIA, LEED AP
Odell Architects, PC


Mark Kung, NCARB
KUNGarchitecture


Paul Brady, AIA
Godden|Sudik Architects

Just a bit of zoning humor...

Variance for a Goat

I would like to request a variance from Section 8-81. (Livestock above or below ground floor) of Denver Municipal Code and request a permit for an Urban Goat.

It is my intent to turn my rooftop deck on my duplex into a green roof. This environmentally friendly feature will not only provide additional insulation to the roof, prevent the heat island effect, but will also serve as an ideal habitat and food supply for my Urban Goat. The half story structure on the roof (as a part of the two-and-a-half story building form) will serve as a holding stall. Due to its size and scale the half story structure cannot be utilized for human habitation therefore it is assumed that it’s placement in the code was intended for a livestock such as goat. The goat’s waste will be collected by a system of gutters and downspouts and deposited in my garden for the purpose of fertilizing and watering.

My garden is my pride and joy. It does not only serve as a water quality facility to treat goat waste, it is also a source of the wholesome produce for my family and neighbors. I want to invite you to tour my ten-foot-square back yard to see what I’m talking about. The short tour takes 45 minutes, while the long tour is 1.5 hour, so please plan accordingly. This urban oasis is a home to 10 hens that provide fresh eggs to the entire city block. Crops such as corn, potatoes, broccoli, pumpkins and cabbage are all abundant in case transportation stops and Denver has to grow its own food. With this application I would also like to request that the City Council does everything humanly possible to prevent my neighbor to the South from popping his top and shading my garden.

I believe that a goat would be an ideal complement to my back yard farming facility. And the flat roof on my duplex will be a very adequate habitat for the goat. In addition to my personal request for a goat I would like to propose that the Urban Goat be a use by right in all residential zones to allow all Denver citizens benefit form the livestock. All SU zones should allow Single Urban Goat (SU-g) while TU zones should allow Two Urban Goats (TU-g).

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Gosia Kung (the Urban Farmer)

Speaking about urban density (11.19.09 Listening Session)

My name is Gosia Kung and I’m a resident of the historic district of Witter Cofield in NW Denver. I am also an architect and LEED accredited professional. I came here today to talk to you about density of urban neighborhoods. I am deeply concerned with the downzoning of 70% of areas currently zoned R2 to Single Unit only designation. It is my opinion that all the areas currently zoned R2 should allow Two Unit developments.

There are three basic types of Two Unit developments: the main house with accessory dwelling unit, top-and-bottom duplex and side-by-side duplex. All three forms are historically present in our neighborhoods and hold tremendous potential in terms of affordable and environmentally responsible housing. Even the side by side duplex covered with stigma of recent year’s developments is far more sustainable option than an oversized single family house, by allowing two families to live in a structure that would otherwise be occupied by only one.

The Two Unit zones will encourage density that is crucial to stimulating a healthy growth of urban neighborhoods. The benefits we will see are:

• More residents moving closer to downtown and thus reducing commute, pollution and traffic.
• Utilizing existing infrastructure, utilities, roads and public services for new housing and less need for development of virgin land.
• Improved performance of local schools.
• Less sprawl and increased quality of life.

In case you were wondering about my accent I was born and grew up in Krakow, Poland. Because of density of historic town and public transportation I never had to learn how to drive. When I was 25 I came to America, got my drivers license and gained 20 pounds. Higher density supports healthy lifestyle by creating walk-able communities. By allowing higher density in urban neighborhoods we may, at least partially, solve our health carecrisis…

I hear so many arguments for solar access and ability to install photovoltaic panels on roofs. There is more to sustainability than tax incentives and reduced utility bills. The responsible growth of urban fabric is essential in creating sustainable lifestyle. Walking, biking, public transportation, public safety, good schools and vibrant communities all depend on the right mixture of uses and appropriate density. Single family suburban lifestyle has proven to fail.

I am a mother of two. My kids are 4 and 1. I’m here today speaking on their behalf, and asking you, to please not base your decisions about zoning and mapping on shortsighted agendas of the few. Please consider the welfare of future generations. Let’s make sure that we are shaping the city that they will be proud of long after we are gone. Thank you.

The D-word

If you live in one of Denver historic neighborhoods you know what I’m talking about. A word so scary I dare not say it out loud. The duplex. The D-people (developers) scraping old bungalows and erecting those god-awful structures. The 5,000 plus square feet McMansions that don’t belong in the quaint setting of old Victorians. Built from one setback line to the other, maximizing the lot. The two-story (or sometimes three-story) boxy structures that shade adjacent gardens. Those walk-in-closet worshipers that bring their neighbors to tears when they look at their property tax statement!

But there are many faces of two-family developments. It is important to understand and recognize the opportunities that they carry. Here are three basic categories:

The Main House and a Carriage House (or ADU – Accessory Dwelling Unit). In this arrangement there are two separate structures on one lot. The Carriage House is a secondary dwelling unit accessed from the alley; often build on top of a two or three-bay garage. The space can serve as home office, studio, guest house or a rental unit. There are tremendous opportunities associated with the ADUs. Imagine being able to invite your aging parents to live with you (close but not too close). Imagine working at home and never having to commute again. Imagine having rental income and being able to afford buying your own home.

Top-and-bottom two-family dwelling – We all know them – a basement apartment used as a rental unit. Sometimes the two units have separate ownership and function as a mini-condo. This type of development has great potential in terms of affordable housing and can provide all the same benefits as mentioned above.

And finally a side-by-side duplex – While covered with stigma of the recent year’s developments the duplex is very common building type in historic neighborhoods. There are examples of very modest single story structures as well as larger multi story buildings. Historically the owner of the house lived in one half and benefited from the rental income from the other half. Nowadays the ownership is typically split along the party wall between the units.



Denver is going through a process of developing the new Zoning Code. The old designations of R1 (Single Family) and R2 (Single Family, Duplexes and Townhouses) are being replaced with new symbols SU (Single Unit) and TU (Two Unit). SU zones will only allow construction of single family houses while TU will allow the three scenarios described above in addition to single family homes. Current drafts of the code propose replacing 70% of residential areas currently zoned R2 with a SU designation. This means that only single family houses will be permitted to be built in the areas that currently allow multiunit developments. The new limitation is supposed to preserve the neighborhoods. However it is important to remember that the D-people can build a single family house that is 5,000 plus square feet, from one setback line to the other, maximizing the lot, shading adjacent gardens and bringing their neighbors to tears when they look at their property tax statement.

The proposed form based code is promised to be context sensitive. Hopefully this new approach to Zoning Codes will result in more respectful developments, regardless from the number of units they house. At the same time it is important to recognize the potential of Two Unit zones. The options that TU allows will benefit our neighborhoods in terms of sustainability, affordable housing and historic preservation. One would hope that in order to maintain the healthy growth of our City all existing R2 zones should be named TU under the new code.

Urban Quilting

I like to think about historic urban neighborhoods as a vibrant patchwork of different colors, patterns and textures stitched together by a grid of streets. As I’m writing this on a chilly October night I think about what makes those quilts so familiar, warm and cozy. And what makes them smell like home to so many of us.

It’s a variety of different types of fabric interacting together. From very fine florals of single family homes, through larger patches of multifamily pockets, neighborhood commercial centers and green parks, to much more prominent, landmark forms of hospitals, schools and churches.

It’s an organic character of the complex organism that grew over time. The different styles of material used. From Victorian lace, to utilitarian (Denver) squares of denim, to orthogonal grids of modern flannel. Every style has its place in the history of this quilt.

So how do we preserve this piece of fiber art? Not by hanging it in a museum behind a glass. Not by “do not touch” policy. The urban fabric has to be patched and repaired constantly like a tattered baby blanket. The best way to preserve historic neighborhoods is to allow them to continue to change and evolve. Those living, breathing organisms have to be allowed to adapt to current market conditions otherwise they will perish and die. Worn out pieces need to be replaced by new patches of developments that better suite our changing lifestyles. Contemporary forms should be introduced to represent their time. New building technologies will contribute to more sustainable construction. Responsible urban quilting is not achieved by freezing time but by continuous maintenance. Without the maintenance colors will fade and the fabric will deteriorate.

City on the Vine (random thoughts on tomatoes and city planning)

“Organically grown” provides the best results not only when it comes to tomatoes. European cities grew organically for thousands of years without control of a zoning code. The only limitation was: stay within the city walls. That regulation ensured density. They did have problems due to the lack of sanitation, but thankfully we have solved those problems now. So why not encourage density and organic growth of our cities?

Well, while at the first glance the idea of a “free range” city seems yummy; on the second thought one may have some reservations. First of all the medieval builders in Europe were faced with limitations. Mainly technical. They had the ability to construct a sky-high cathedral but average town house was limited to three or four stories. They also didn’t have to deal with car traffic and parking issues. When we think about our cities right now, and realize what complex and sophisticated organisms they are, it seems that some planning might be a good idea. But how much planning is too much?

New Denver zoning code is “form based”. What it means is that the planners came up with a set of forms that are appropriate for certain uses and locations. For example, they are saying, if you want to build a house in one of the near-downtown neighborhoods this is what it needs to look like. And here comes a sketch of a house and a list of requirements regarding the floor height above grade, the wall plate height, the length of wall, the jogs in the wall, the porch location and size… Wait a second! It’s a complete design! Have we gone too far? Do we really need the City planners to tell us how many steps we need to climb to get to the front door of our house? (by the way, the ADA accessible, on-grade entry is not allowed under the current draft)

What is this controlled approach going to do to our city? There are covenanted communities in our area to examine. Highlands Ranch comes to mind. Let’s think about it for a minute: Character? Charm? Vibrant mix of forms and uses? Walkable community? Hmmm…Let’s go back to Europe for a second. What is so fascinating about those old towns built without a plan? Character? Charm?.... How did they do it?

Dear City Planners, please focus on transportation, growth and sustainability. Please protect our residential areas from heavy industrial uses. Please keep Wal-Mart away from the downtown. Tell us all about uses, setbacks, allowable floor area ratios and even height of the structures. But please let architects do their job of designing the buildings. We promise we won’t mess up your grand vision.


Sincerely,


Gosia Kung (the architect)

Stagnation

I am a big fan of Seth Godin. Here are fragments of one of my favorite essays by him - Stagnation is easy, change is hard.

“They want to make the supermarket near my house better. Add free parking for all the people who want to shop in the village (where there is no free parking). Add more fresh produce and organic foods, as well as an enhanced deli/prepared food section. They also want to take over an abandoned lot where a car dealership stood abandoned for years, and eliminate a little-used street that messes up the traffic.

The town is up in arms!

There are petitions everywhere. People are outraged. Shocked. It'll ruin everything.

It seems as though it's easy to be against change.

There's a toxic waste dump in my town, crowned by an old, rusting, abandoned water tower. There's actually a committee to protect the water tower, given that it signifies an important part of our (toxic) heritage.”

“If I ran the Stop & Shop supermarket near my house, I'd bluff. I'd pull bulldozers and wrecking balls into town and tell everyone I was going to demolish my no longer profitable store and then leave the parking lot filled with bricks so no one could park there and jog over the wine store while using my parking lot.

The outrage would be so profound I'd have no trouble at all selling the town on a small upgrade.

All change isn't good. Not at all. But the knee jerk irrational opposition to change is less good. Marketing is all about making change. More often than not, a good way to sell that change is not with the promise for gain. It's with the fear of loss. Sad but true.”

Sad but true it is. And it painfully applies to the current discussion regarding the Zoning Code – the Downzoning (stagnation) versus the Sustainable Growth. Here is another way to look at the issue:

Denver population is expected to grow from 2.5 million today to 4 million by the year 2030. An average high-rise residential tower of 20 stories may house approximately 160 apartments. 160 apartments x 2.5 people per apartment = 400 people. How many high-rise towers are we going to need to accommodate the growth of our City? Given the City limits are fixed, where are those towers going to be built? How is this going to affect the urban landscape of Denver? Maybe duplexes and row houses are not so bad after all?

Down-zoning or Green Growth?

“Down-zoning will preserve historic neighborhoods because it will eliminate scrapes, prohibit McMansion duplex construction and stop contemporary developments”. This and similar statements are carried by the proponents of replacing current R-2 zoning (that allows duplexes and row houses) with the single family zoning. Few comments come to mind:

• The current or new zoning codes do not prohibit demolition (scrapes) of existing structures. Those decisions are made by individual property owners based on technical and economical evaluation.
• A single family residence can take on a size of a duplex. It’s a question of form, not use.
• Codes do not regulate a style of architecture. A style is a matter of personal preference not legislation.

The down-zoning does not accomplish the intent of preserving the character of our neighborhoods. The down-zoning will induce stagnation by eliminating opportunities for increasing density and bringing new population to the neighborhoods. With this current proposal of the new zoning code there lies a tremendous opportunity but also a responsibility. Peter Park said: “When cities stop changing, they start dying”. So what is green growth?

• Green growth prevents sprawl.
• Green growth recognizes potential of already established neighborhoods. Existing infrastructure, schools, transportation, retail etc. along with proximity to downtown present a great opportunity. By bringing new, young population to those neighborhoods we continue to revitalize the community making it more desirable.
• Green growth is respectful to the existing character of neighborhoods. New developments are subordinate to the historic structures in terms of scale, setbacks and forms. New “form based” code can control those aspects without eliminating opportunities for multifamily living.
• Green growth means sustainable and respectful developments.

When I decided to move to Northwest Denver I was excited to become a part of this vibrant and growing community. The schools are improving and the property values are going up. I would like to see this growth to continue. Neil Goldschmidt, the mastermind behind the planning effort that turned Portland into the city it is today said: “Ours is the city with much to cherish, much to love and too much to lose to remain idle”. I would like to place my vote for the green growth.

Vanishing Equity

Meet Debbie. Single mom living in Northwest Denver. Last year three developers approach her about buying her modest 1300 SF house. They offered way more than she paid for it, enough to get her and her young children to a larger home. Debbie was excited and dreamed about moving to a new house. Than, her property got down zoned in March of last year. The developers withdrew their offers. The dream was over. Now Debbie is stuck. Her family really needs a bigger place but nobody wants to buy her house as is and Debbie has no money to remodel or build an addition.

Meet Bob. Bob is a retired consultant. Bob would like to sell his house in Wash Park and move to California. His 1400 SF residence is too small and too outdated for a modern family. For a while Bob hoped that a developer may buy his property but he is about to fall victim of down zoning as well. His new hope was building a carriage house on the alley to add equity to his property. Bob hired an architect and together they created a plan for a two story ADU (accessory dwelling unit) with 2-car garage on the main floor and apartment on the second floor. When Bob applied for a building permit he was told that carriage houses were not allowed in Denver. All Bob could build on the back portion of his lot was a garage, so that’s what he did. Bob is still fighting his battle hoping that one day he will be allowed to add a second story apartment to his garage.

The value of the property is greatly affected by the zoning laws. A change in property zoning designation can increase or decrease its value. Typically the higher the zoning the higher the property value. For most us home equity is our biggest asset. This is why when the City Planners propose a new zoning code we should pay attention because the change will touch all of us.

The proposed zoning code drastically reduces development opportunities in many Denver neighborhoods. While we all agree that a new code is necessary to control the scale of the new construction the change in the land entitlement is very concerning. The current plan is estimated to wipe down one billion dollars of equity in the City of Denver. An average property will lose 20% of its value if down zoned from R-2 to a single family dwelling.

To learn more about the new Denver code and to post your comments go to: http://www.newcodedenver.org/

The three magic letters - ADU

My friend Erin asked me to look at houses with her. With two kids and third on the way her family outgrown the 1400 SF Victorian they live in. She’s looking for a home that will satisfy their immediate needs and allow some room for growth in the future. I gladly agreed to spend an afternoon with her as I love exploring the real estate world, particularly in terms of potential.

Our first stop was a three-bedroom Dutch Colonial. We discussed possibility of two story addition on the side. Then, Erin explained that her mother-in-law’s health is deteriorating and soon she may need to move in with Erin’s family. I pointed at the existing garage structure and said: This might be your solution. The magic three letters – ADU!

ADU stands for Accessory Dwelling Unit (aka Carriage House, Granny Flat etc.) It is a secondary living space placed on the alley. ADUs are present in some older neighborhoods but in past 50 years the zoning code did not allow them.

Erin was happy to know that soon she may be allowed to turn existing garage into a one bedroom apartment and invite her mother in law to stay there. Close but not too close. The carriage house will provide living arrangement for the family with opportunity for privacy and assistance when needed.

The new zoning code re-introduces the carriage house in some residential areas. The additional living space can be used as a studio, home office, guest house or a rental unit. A young family occupying the main house will have opportunity to supplement their mortgage with rental income. Aging empty nesters can move to the carriage house and rent the main house to a growing family. An artist can utilize the space as a studio…

To learn more about ADUs and to comment on the proposed zoning code go to http://www.newcodedenver.org/.

Welcome back ADUs!

Downzoning of NW Denver

For everybody who, like me, missed this on TV: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liUCCyDEZjM&feature=channel http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvsxcvlhC90&feature=channel http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJ1SgCTVBJ8&feature=channel

The argument as old as time

I was trying hard to stay out of the discussion about new developments in historic neighborhoods but the recent comment on my blog forced me to step in. So, here is my take on this, old as time, dispute.

Whenever a group of progressive, innovative entrepreneurs introduces something new they meet with the conservative opposition. When in early 1900 developers started building first Denver Squares they were criticized by the owners of older Victorian homes. They introduced a form that was new and unfamiliar and got some heat for that.

Many entrepreneurial architects, builders and developers live in the area they work in. It allows them to see opportunity that others may miss. They often invest their lifetime savings to introduce creative, sustainable housing options to their beloved neighborhoods. Those not-afraid-of-risk individuals got hit particularly hard by the current recession. I do hope however that they will hold on to their properties and when the time is right new progressive developments will sprout everywhere. After all, down-zoning or not, it’s their spirit that moves us forward. And if in the process they make a buck or two more power to them!

P.S. I would like to dedicate this post to the first guy who looked at the pile of sticks and mud and thought of building a shack. He must have been widely criticized by his fellow citizens living in the trees. After all they’d been living in the trees for thousands of years, the trees protected them from wild animals, surely that must have been perceived as the best way of living. Sometimes they fell down and broke a limb or two but they didn’t want to see those odd cone shaped structures between the trees that were so familiar to them. Thank you, my fellow architect/builder for seeing an opportunity and keeping at it!

Downzoning Berkeley is contrary to sustainable development goals

Great article http://www.thedenverdailynews.com/article.php?aID=5303