Skip to content
Archive of posts filed under the Urbanism category.

Lessons from Vancouver

Recently I had the opportunity to travel to Vancouver, BC as part of the Downtown Denver Partnership‘s urban exploration program. Our group included about 60 downtown leaders and officials, and the purpose of the trip was to learn about different design and policy initiatives used successfully in Vancouver that we could potentially adopt to improve Downtown Denver.

2010-06-29_vancouver8

Downtown Vancouver is an amazing place. A city and metro area almost identical in population to Denver, their downtown is covered by (literally) hundreds of residential towers, along with office towers, all the usual civic buildings and cultural amenities, exceptional parks, and substantial retail.  Over 90,000 people call Downtown Vancouver home in an area 1.75 miles by 1.0 miles—about the same size as in Denver bounded by the South Platte River to the State Capitol, and Speer Boulevard to Park Avenue. Here’s Downtown Vancouver via GoogleEarth with 3-D Buildings:

2010-06-29_vancouver1

How Downtown Vancouver transformed over the course of about 20 years into a dense, residentially oriented and livable downtown was the result of a convergence of many factors, including worldwide exposure from hosting the 1986 World Expo; a flood of investment capital in advance of the 1999 transfer of Hong Kong to China (and, since then, investment capital from throughout the world); a strong pro-environmental and progressive cultural ethic; a vibrant local economy; anticipation over hosting the 2010 Winter Olympics; a geographically constrained urban core; and municipal leadership that’s unapologetically and aggressively pro-urban. Imagine a city Denver’s size with dozens of One Lincoln Parks and Glass Houses coming online every year for over two decades running (with no slowdown in sight). That’s Vancouver.

2010-06-29_vancouver2

It’s impossible for me to recount the hundreds of great ideas, key decisions, and influential policies that we learned about on the trip in this blog post, but I’ll share with you a few that really stood out to me:

When asked about the city’s policy and spending priorities within the public realm, the Vancouver planning director said in a very matter-of-fact manner:

1. Pedestrians
2. Bicycles
3. Transit
4. Movement of goods
5. Private automobiles

…in that order, period. And this is not just a planning department priority order, but one shared enthusiastically by Public Works, Parks & Rec, and everyone in the city from the Mayor on down. That priority order permeates everything they do in Vancouver, and it shows. It’s no coincidence that Vancouver routinely ranks as one of the most livable cities in not only North America, but the world. In Denver, we are slowly coming around to those priorities, but we have a long way to go before it becomes an institutionalized way of thinking.

2010-06-29_vancouver5

Vancouver requires a lot from their development community. Parks, plazas, promenades, civic projects, transit improvements, schools, day care centers… you name it, if it’s something that adds to the livability of the city, the city requires developers to help pay for these things (what they call the “common wealth”) if the developers are going to be granted a building permit. But in exchange for all of that civic investment, the city rewards the developers with substantial density bonuses and a streamlined review process. The city’s strategy is that a successful project must be a win-win for both the developer and the community. The city will work whatever deal is necessary to make the project profitable for the developer while also making sure the project contributes to the vitality of the city. Now, to be fair, this is a strategy that works because there is such a tremendous demand to build projects in Vancouver, that the city is in a position of calling the shots. But, one of the reasons why demand to invest in Vancouver is so strong is because of the high quality of life that has resulted from all those amenities that were built with help from the development community.

2010-06-29_vancouver7

Vancouver is known for its “point” tower: a thin structure rising up from a podium base that extends to the property line. In Vancouver, each tower above the podium must be at least 80 feet from its neighbor. This results in a checkerboard-like distribution of towers across the downtown with plenty of air and sun and nice views in between while, at the sidewalk level, the podium provides a strong street wall punctuated only by the carefully placed public park or plaza. In Vancouver, those tower podiums are usually only two or three stories high and consist of various activities such as retail, lobby functions, offices, or community uses. Parking? It’s all underground. Above-ground structured parking is not allowed.

2010-06-29_vancouver3

Towers in Vancouver are not allowed to have a flat boxy top. The developer/architect is required do something interesting at the top. The city doesn’t dictate what the top must look like and it doesn’t have to be fancy, it just can’t be a box.

2010-06-29_vancouver6

There are 14 full-service grocery stores in Downtown Vancouver (plus urban versions of Home Depot and many other big-box retailers). Want retail? Need lots of people.

2010-06-29_vancouver4

Vancouver is known for its family-friendly downtown. They made the decision that their downtown wasn’t going to be for just young professionals and empty-nesters. Not only do they have an affordable housing requirement (as does Denver), but they also have a family-housing requirement: each development must have a certain number or percentage of three- or four-bedroom units to accommodate families. That, combined with plenty of downtown schools, day care centers, and kid-friendly public spaces, has mostly eliminated the “gotta move to the suburbs after the kids are born” routine that is so typical here in Denver. In fact, the demographic that has been a big part of the city’s population growth has been suburbanites with kids moving into Downtown.

2010-06-29_vancouver9

Ground-floor retail is required in buildings only along certain streets (primarily those with transit). Otherwise, the ground floors of buildings must be visually permeable with interesting/engaging designs to the pedestrian, nice landscaping, etc., but retail isn’t forced to be everywhere.

2010-06-29_vancouver10

I could go on, but that’s enough for now. Each of these topics have clear applications for Denver. As a result of this trip, I’m even more committed to advocating for more progressive thinking about how Downtown Denver should grow and prosper. Vancouver’s experience can help us get there.


Denver Approves New Zoning Code

The Denver City Council just passed, unanimously, the new Denver Zoning Code. I haven’t blogged much about the new zoning code over the past five years because, frankly, I haven’t had the time or the energy to give it the coverage it deserved, with all those infill projects to talk about. But that doesn’t mean I haven’t been a strong supporter of the Herculean effort that planning director Peter Park and the Community Planning & Development staff, the Zoning Code Task Force, City Council, and thousands of citizens have undertaken to give Denver a 21st Century zoning code.

Denver’s now-former zoning code had its origins in the 1950s. That code reflected the values at that time which could be generalized in a few words: “make our city as automobile-friendly as possible” and “old and small urbanism is bad, new and big urbanism is good, regardless of location”. The old code didn’t just allow, but encouraged the destruction of historic neighborhoods through incompatible development, required new development to be designed around the automobile, and generally dehumanized our built environment. While our values and our plans eventually changed to reflect the type of city-building that originally gave us the mixed-use, sustainable, pedestrian-oriented places we treasure most, our zoning code was still promoting—dictating even—quite the opposite. Now, the city’s zoning code, which is nothing more than a regulatory tool for implementing our plans and our vision for the city’s future, is in sync with those plans and that vision. This fundamental restructuring of how we regulate our built environment is on par with our investments in DIA or FasTracks: it is profound in the magnitude of its potential to help us achieve exceptional urbanism in Denver.

Like any major effort, the new zoning code is not perfect, and no one is saying that it is. But the city must be commended for being up to the challenge in the first place, and for the extensive outreach and collaborative process they implemented to accomplish the task. Even people who have a particular nit to pick with the new code acknowledge the exhaustive work and open process the city followed to make the new code as good as can be expected at this time. Appropriately, many tweaks to the new code will be made over the coming months and years, but as of June 21, 2010, we now have in place a zoning code that is in harmony with our land use and transportation plans and rooted in the perspective that zoning is not just about land use, but about neighborhood context and building form too. The real test of the new zoning code will obviously come through the private sector attempting to develop new projects under it, so how well it really works remains to be seen. But even a partially flawed new code consistent with our ideals and vision is infinitely better than an old code that was philosophically antithetical to our current city-building values.

In one fell swoop, yet years in the making, the zoning map and the zoning code for the entire City and County of Denver just radically changed. It’s a big deal, and I am proud of our city for achieving it.


You Are Invited: The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces

William Whyte was an American urbanist who used the direct observation method for understanding and analyzing how people use public spaces. Whyte authored numerous books on cities and public spaces and was considered a leading expert on pedestrian behaviors. One of his most regarded books was the 1980 title “The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces” which was made into a one-hour movie in 1988. The film is quite interesting, surprisingly humorous at times, and a must-see for anyone interested in urban public spaces.

With the design currently underway for several significant public spaces at Denver Union Station, the Union Station Advocates has teamed up with real estate firm Urban Market Partners and the local chapters of the American Planning Association and the American Society of Landscape Architects to arrange for a public viewing of Whyte’s “The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces” movie, followed by an open discussion about Union Station’s two major public spaces (17th Street Gardens and Wynkoop Plaza). The discussion will be facilitated by Ellen Ittelson, senior planner with the Denver planning office, and your DenverInfill blogger, Ken Schroeppel.

The event will be held Thursday, June 17 from 5:00 to 7:30 PM at 1430 Delgany (white building with the flowery facade next to the Waterside Lofts, just down the street from the Museum of Contemporary Art). The event is FREE to the public, although a small cash donation at the door would be greatly appreciated to help cover our costs. Light refreshments will be available. YOU are invited!

Here’s a flyer:

2010-06-16_whyte_movie

We hope to see you Thursday for urbanism-at-the-movies night!


The Slow Home Project

The blog today was written by Caroline Tracey, a college student from Denver in the Urban Studies program at Yale University. She contacted me and offered to research and author a blog post for DenverInfill. Around the same time, I was contacted by John Brown, a Professor of Architecture at the University of Calgary, who suggested a great design topic for this blog. I put the two of them in contact with each other and… here we go: Caroline’s well written blog article on John’s Slow Home project. Thank you both for your contribution.

======

Do you live in a fast house or a slow home?  Do you know how to tell the difference?  Though everyone reacts to design intuitively, most people do not know how to interpret it, or understand how it affects them.  If you have felt allured by design but unable to understand its language, Slow Home has an antidote for you.  And it has arrived in Denver.

After observing “a lack of understanding about the fundamental problems of the housing industry and a disconnect between the understanding that professionals learn and what builders are doing in practice,” John Brown, a professor of architecture at the University of Calgary, started Slow Home.  He recognized the need to raise awareness about good design, and hoped to foster widespread understanding about the importance of good design.

Brown came up with the idea of a “slow home” during a conversation about the Slow Food movement with his sister, a chef. He found that the more he developed the analogy, the more it seemed appropriate to explain the current housing industry in North America.  “I started to tell my clients,” he says, “that houses in suburbia are the fast food of housing – all standardized and homogenized.”  In the same way that Slow Food considers the source of ingredients, their composition, and the act of preparing meals, Brown’s Slow Home Project intends to raise awareness about the sourcing of materials for homes, the decisions that go into the design of a home, and its workmanship.

So what does the project do? At is foundation is the Slow Home Test, which Brown describes as a tool that gives people a skill set through which to understand design and evaluate design quality.  Fourteen indicators are weighted to add up to a possible twenty points.  Points are earned in the categories, “the house in the world,” “the house as a whole,” and “room by room.” Continuing the analogy of Slow Homes to Slow Food, Brown says, “until we knew about trans fats, we didn’t have a language to talk about the problems they cause.”  The understanding of the language of design afforded by the test allows it to be a tool to influence consumers’ buying decisions and to understand what could be improved in one’s own house.  It allows consumers to be educated about how to “vote with their dollars.”

Next, Brown took Slow Home on tour.  This is where Denver comes in.  Brown recognized a “sizeable online community” at theslowhome.com, and decided to put it to work surveying design in nine large North American cities.  Denver follows Los Angeles, Toronto, and Dallas.  Members of the online community evaluate floor plans of new houses in each city using the Slow Home test, in order to create a data set about the quality of new home design in the cities.  So far, 2,100 homes, in the categories apartments/lofts, townhouses, and single-family detached homes, have been evaluated.

The preliminary results about Denver “are essentially an inversion of the results from other cities,” says Brown.  In the apartment/loft and townhouse categories, the percentage of plans meeting Slow Home’s minimum design quality standards is lower than in other cities.  But in the detached single-family home category, in which the percentage meeting the minimum standards – thirteen out of twenty points on the test – is generally the lowest, Denver’s results are higher than other cities.  More than forty percent of new single-family homes surveyed meet minimum design standards.  Eleven percent meet standards to be considered a “Slow Home,” which Brown says is an impressive fraction – to be considered a “Slow Home,” a home must earn seventeen of twenty possible points on the Slow Home Test.  It must be well designed inside, well located, and meet environmental standards.  Seven percent of single-family homes in Dallas were “Slow Homes,” and just three percent of those in Toronto.  And Miami? “Miami is just out to lunch,” says Brown.

2010-05-22_slow_home_graph

Brown attributes Denver’s higher quality of design of single-family homes to a citywide interest in the environment and in community.  There are several urban renewal projects in the city that are doing well, he adds, including the redevelopments of Lowry and Stapleton.  Whereas “in other cities, all the new single family houses are way out in the suburbs where no one cares about them,” these projects in Denver are closer to the center of the city, and are under more scrutiny than new suburban projects.  Their design was considered more carefully, and in turn they score higher on the Slow Home test, shifting Denver’s results towards slowness.

Brown asserts that where we choose to live affects our lives.  To illustrate this point, he turns to an analogy about shoes: “wearing a pair of shoes that doesn’t fit is unpleasant – it makes your life harder, not better.”  In the same way, buying a house that has a “large unused front living room, a garage that blocks the whole front of the house so that there’s no natural sunlight, or that requires you to commute two hours each day” will not improve your quality of life.  Brown hopes that Slow Home’s design education tools will allow consumers to demand better design.  It values not expensive design, but simple, intuitive considerations by developers.  “People who understand design will refuse to buy a house without front entry closets, bedrooms with natural light, or a walkable neighborhood,” he says.

“There are people doing good work,” he continues; and with the right tools, “people will see the differences.  It’s not about telling people they’re living the wrong way, it’s about providing entertaining, educational tools to be a more informed consumer.”

Anyone can join the entertainment and education at theslowhome.com, where Brown posts daily video design exercises including analyzing and comparing floorplans and voting for the Slow Home awards for the surveyed cities.  The Slow Home awards for good new design in Denver are viewable at http://theslowhome.com/slow-home-project/denver-wrap-up/#comments.  WashPark Green, the winner for a single-family home, is pictured below.

2010-05-22_slow_home_winner


2010 Rocky Mountain Real Estate Challenge

One of the most unique and exciting competitions in the realm of urban development is the annual Rocky Mountain Real Estate Challenge. The challenge is organized by the Colorado chapter of NAIOP, the nation’s premier commercial real estate development association.

Each year, the real estate development program at the University of Denver’s Daniels College of Business faces off against its counterpart at the University of Colorado’s Leeds School of Business over a particularly complex real estate development scenario. Over the past couple of months, several student teams within each program have battled over who gets the right to represent their university in the final competition. The two finalist teams are now set, with the final competition presentations and judging coming up on May 5 at the Marriott City Center in Downtown.

This year, the City and County of Denver is the client, and they have asked the teams to explore redevelopment opportunities in the Denver Coliseum/River North area. With various industrial and railroad uses, an interstate highway, the Platte River, old and new infrastructure, surface parking lots, a future FasTracks transit station, and the Coliseum itself all clustered into this emerging district north of Downtown, the students definitely have their work cut out for them. Their challenge: come up with an exciting and viable development project based on intense research, financial analysis, and physical design, and present their proposal before a big crowd of commercial real estate development professionals. No sweat.

For more on the rules to the challenge and background information on the site, view this PDF that was issued to the student teams. Want to attend the final presentations on May 5?  You can get all the program details and register using this form or online at the NAIOP website.

After May 5, the DenverInfill Blog will present the presentations from the two student teams. Best of luck to both schools!


Doors Open Denver 2010 – This Weekend!

One of the best annual events in our fair city is Doors Open Denver. Each April we celebrate Architecture Month in Denver by opening the doors to dozens of the the city’s most interesting buildings and sites and letting the general public tour the insides. Best of all, it’s free!

This year’s DOD features over 80 buildings and sites. Most are clustered in and around the Downtown area but several are located in neighborhoods throughout the city. Here’s a map of the locations, and if you go to the Doors Open Denver website, you’ll find the list of all the participating sites organized several ways.

Doors Open Denver site map - click to enlarge

Over thirty of the buildings have special Expert Tours that occur at specific times during the weekend. Since capacity is limited on these Expert Tours, on the day of the tour, you must first get a free registration pass at DOD headquarters at Union Station for the Expert Tour you’re interested in.  The free registration passes are given out on a first-come first-served basis. Since the Expert Tours “sell out” quickly, I strongly recommend you get to Union Station early in the morning (they open at 8:30 AM) to get your Expert Tour passes for that day. Otherwise, no registration is needed and you can simply show up to any participating building or site at any time between 10AM and 4PM, Saturday or Sunday, for a self-guided tour. A few of the sites have special hours, so please double check the list on the DOD website.

There are also a variety of other special events, such as self-guided Urban Adventure Tours, a photo contest, and activities for families and kids, such as Box City in the Wellington Webb building. I’ve served as a volunteer at Box City several times; check out my blog on the 2007 Box City. It’s a lot of fun.

Doors Open Denver is the perfect opportunity to explore Denver’s urban architecture by foot (or by bike or take Light Rail) and the weather this weekend looks pretty decent, so get out and celebrate Denver’s architectural and urban heritage this weekend at Doors Open Denver. I know I am.