Neal Payton on Deferential Urbanism

963 views
875 views

Published on

by Neal Payton in Tel-Aviv for the Israeli Mayors Institute, founded by the Movement for Israeli Urbanism - www.miu.org.il

Deferential Urbanism: The Charrette Process and its Effect on Place-making and City Design

Published in: Design, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
963
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
27
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Neal Payton on Deferential Urbanism

  1. 1. Deferential Urbanism
  2. 2. Shirlington • Library • 400,000 sf of Retail (Old + New) Arlington, VA • Theater • 250 Rental Apartments • Plaza Fountain • 325 Condos • Harris Teeter • 750,000 sf of Office
  3. 3. Shirlington • Library • 400,000 sf of Retail (Old + New) Arlington, VA • Theater • 250 Rental Apartments • Plaza Fountain • 325 Condos • Harris Teeter • 750,000 sf of Office
  4. 4. City West Cincinnati, OH
  5. 5. College Park Memphis, TN
  6. 6. MLK, Jr. Philadelphia, PA Before
  7. 7. College Park Memphis, TN
  8. 8. Placeholder – MLK MLK
  9. 9. Salishan Tacoma, WA
  10. 10. The Charrette Process: Consensus Based An effective Charrette: • Seeks citizen input • Is community– specific and builds upon a community’s strengths and opportunities • Defines and characterizes the neighborhood development • Establishes a coordinated plan of action for shorter and longer term physical improvements
  11. 11. Interactive design process - Charrettes Definition: An intensive design process on site - open to all for real time critiques usually lasting 3-6 days Pros: Cons: Immediate feedback Requires big upfront effort Gets all stakeholders talking to Small projects may not be each other appropriate candidates. Invests stakeholders in design Somewhat open ended Sometimes improves the design May not get enough participation Great PR and marketing Sometimes insults the design - may attract initial buyers Short term design costs are higher Identifies supporters May fatigue the community Efficient and quick Stakeholders wary
  12. 12. Pattern of Streets. Can you find the Public Housing Site?.
  13. 13. Pattern of Streets - transformed
  14. 14. Pattern of Civic Spaces
  15. 15. The Charrette Process: Consensus Based Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Open House (open) Stakeholder Stakeholder AM Work Session Presentation Meetings Meetings (open) Who We Are Work Session Work Session PM Work Session •Great Neighborhoods Public Mid-Point (closed) •Site Analysis Presentation Presentation • Community Input •Feedback/Commu •Feedback/Commun
  16. 16. Open Process: Community Dialogue begins early Acknowledgement of community’s loss All relevant stakeholders identified Community’s hot buttons identified Interactive design process Accept feedback Supporters aid in approvals
  17. 17. Main Goals of Master Plan • Create a “Sense of Place” • Form a new “Town Center” • Build series of “Village Squares” • Expand street network throughout area • Reduce retail / Increase residential
  18. 18. Interactive design process - Charrettes Tips: 1. Begin with visual discussion and examples of the concepts. 2. Allow for both formal and informal critiques. 3. Include public and elected officials where possible. 4. Let everyone know that all will be heard, but not all ideas are doable. 5. Conclude with big presentation, and wonderful drawings as well as timetable for action. 6. After charrette, act fast while feelings are good and before opposition can mobilize. 7. Enlist support of attendees.
  19. 19. 1. Begin with visual discussion and examples of the concepts. Pedestrian Zone • Make Great Sidewalks
  20. 20. Coast Highway and Washington looking South
  21. 21. Coast Highway and Washington looking South
  22. 22. Coast Highway and Washington looking South
  23. 23. Coast Highway and Washington looking South
  24. 24. 2. Allow for both formal and informal critiques.
  25. 25. Macarthur Park, Los Angeles, California
  26. 26. 5 5 4 7 10 8 6 5 5 5 10 9 4 2 1 3 1. METRO PLAZA 6. PLAY YARD 2. METRO ENTRANCE 7. ENTRY COURTYARD 3. MACARTHUR PARK 8. MONUMENTAL 4. PASEO STAIR 5. COURTYARD 9. GRAPHIC BOARD 10. TERRACE Macarthur Park, Los Angeles, California
  27. 27. Macarthur Park, Los Angeles, California
  28. 28. Macarthur Park, Los Angeles, California
  29. 29. THE ELLINGTON
  30. 30. Ground Floor Georgia ave./petworth
  31. 31. 3. Include public and elected officials where possible.
  32. 32. 4. Let everyone know that all will be heard, but not all ideas are doable.
  33. 33. Road Diet Phase 1: Apply road diet to W. San Antonio Area has “good bones” Proximate to Town Square Consistent street front and historic building fabric Proximate to large parking lots Concentration of Entertainment/Cultural Destinations
  34. 34. Road Diet Phase 1: Apply road diet to W. San Antonio. Narrow road from 4 to 2 lanes with center left-hand turning lane Increased reverse angled parking Added street trees Curb extensions shorten pedestrian crossing distances Traffic calming pavement designs at intersections
  35. 35. The Coast Highway Master Plan Process: Vision for the Coast Highway Overarching concept includes: Transportation Land use Design Phasing Market Assessments
  36. 36. Strategy • Infill Development – Pedestrian Friendly • Catalytic Sites - Destinations • Traffic calming – Road Diet • Roundabouts • Re-integrate the street grid • Rationalize Parking • Building Type Selection • Mix of building heights
  37. 37. The Coast Highway Master Plan Process: Vision for the Coast Highway Master Plans for Districts North Coast (July charrette) Mid Coast / South Coast (August Charrette)
  38. 38. The Coast Highway Master Plan Process: Vision for the Coast Highway Master Plans for Districts North Coast (July charrette) Mid Coast / South Coast (August Charrette)
  39. 39. North Coast Highway Plan Rubrics 1) Signature Gateways 2) Neighborhoods/ Destinations 3) Linkages 4) Views Downtown Cinema
  40. 40. North County Vision Plan
  41. 41. Arts Bridge Existing Proposed
  42. 42. The Nodes Arts District Gateway South O. Village Mid-Coast Center Sprinter Station Oceanside Blvd. Wisconsin. Vista Way Cassidy Transit Center Loma Alta Creek Arts & Technology District
  43. 43. The Nodes The Avenue • Urbane – Village or Town Like • Center Median • Wide Sidewalks • Green Edges • Buildings to Back of Sidewalk • Wide Front Yards • No Auto-Oriented Uses • Auto-Oriented Uses Okay • No Industrial Uses • No Industrial Uses • Mixed-Use • Multi-Family Residential Okay
  44. 44. The Nodes Arts District Gateway South O. Village Mid-Coast Center Sprinter Station Oceanside Blvd. Wisconsin. Vista Way Cassidy Transit Center Loma Alta Creek Arts & Technology District
  45. 45. The Nodes The Avenue • Urbane – Village or Town Like • Center Median • Wide Sidewalks • Green Edges • Buildings to Back of Sidewalk • Wide Front Yards • No Auto-Oriented Uses • Auto-Oriented Uses Okay • No Industrial Uses • No Industrial Uses • Mixed-Use • Multi-Family Residential Okay
  46. 46. Transit Center Mid-Coast Center Arts District Gateway Arts & Technology District Sprinter Station Loma Alta Creek South O. Village
  47. 47. Infill Buildings Transit Station New Surface Parking Renovated Building Park-Once Garage
  48. 48. Coast Highway at Washington looking West
  49. 49. Coast Highway at Washington looking West
  50. 50. Arts & Technology District Ditmar School Oceanside Blvd. Sprinter Station Loma Alta Creek
  51. 51. Sprinter Station Vision Plan Retail Residential Live/Work Sprinter Station Hotel/Retail Neighborhood Green Hotel/Retail Retail Enhanced SWM / Loma Alta Pedestrian Trails
  52. 52. Cassidy Buena Vista Lagoon South O. Village Vista Way
  53. 53. South O Village Vision Plan
  54. 54. Coast Highway and Cassidy looking South
  55. 55. Coast Highway and Cassidy looking South
  56. 56. Coast Highway and Cassidy looking South
  57. 57. Coast Highway and Cassidy looking South
  58. 58. Coast Highway and Cassidy looking South
  59. 59. South O. Village Buena Vista Lagoon Cassidy Vista Way
  60. 60. Uniform Development
  61. 61. Development at Midblock
  62. 62. Development at Corners
  63. 63. Average Height Requirement
  64. 64. 50’
  65. 65. Ch 2, pg 19
  66. 66. Mays Street –Looking North Existing
  67. 67. Figure ground
  68. 68. CIRCULATION
  69. 69. Main Street
  70. 70. Downtown Streets Main Street and Mays Street N S E W
  71. 71. The Plan First Ideas
  72. 72. The Plan Concepts Roundabout Roundabout Roundabout Park Park Park Redevelopment Area Mays Street Round Park Rock Ave Town Museu Green m TOD Main Street Site Extension City Hall Green
  73. 73. The Plan Roundabout Roundabout Park Park Park Redevelopment Area Park Town Museum Green TOD Site City Hall Green
  74. 74. The Plan Park Pedestrian Bridge Roundabout Social Roundabout Services Park Center Town Woodbine Green Museumc Train Station City Hall Green Commercial Development
  75. 75. The Plan West Downtown Entry Retail/Offic e New Retail/ Hotel Office Main Street New Theater Garage/ Retail
  76. 76. The Plan Site of Main Street Entry - Existing
  77. 77. The Vision Main Street Gateway Ch 2, pg 7
  78. 78. Town Square City Hall Square
  79. 79. The Plan Site of New Town Green - Existing Conditions
  80. 80. The Plan Site of New Town Green – Transformed!
  81. 81. Mays Street –Looking North Existing
  82. 82. Mays Street –Looking North After Streetscaping and Restriping
  83. 83. Mays Street –Looking North After Some Infill Development
  84. 84. Mays Street –Looking North After ReDevelopment
  85. 85. The Vision New Town Square Ch 2, pg 40
  86. 86. The Vision New Town Square Ch 2, pg 25
  87. 87. Fort Belvoir
  88. 88. Fort Belvoir
  89. 89. Fort Belvoir
  90. 90. Fort Belvoir
  91. 91. 5. Conclude with big presentation, and wonderful drawings as well as timetable for action.
  92. 92. PLACEHOLDER

×