|
�ij.ji �I f -lei i?I,i1 �;rZ =T� i � +ail!
<br />ASK THE AUTHOR JOIN US ONLI
<br />Go online during the month of December to participate in
<br />our `Ask the Author" forum, an interactive feature of Zon-
<br />ing Practice. Bret C. Keast, AICP, will be available to answer
<br />questions about this article. Go to the APA website at www.
<br />planning.org and follow the links to the Ask the Author
<br />section. From there, just submit your questions about the
<br />article using the e-mail link. The author will reply, and •
<br />Zoning Practice will post the answers cumulatively on
<br />the website for the benefit of all subscribers. This feature
<br />will be available for selected issues ofZoning Practice at
<br />announced times. After each online discussion is closed,
<br />the answers will be saved in an online archive available
<br />through the APA Zoning Practice web pages.
<br />delineated by design types. These types
<br />include urban core, urban, and auto -urban
<br />within the urban class; suburban and estate
<br />within the sub -urban class; and countryside,
<br />agricultural, and natural within the rural class.
<br />Of course, there will be variations among the
<br />design types depending on a multitude of fac-
<br />tors including, but not limited to, topography,
<br />geology and soils, climatic conditions, and
<br />the context of the environment, together with
<br />the laws and common practices of different
<br />states and places.
<br />Use of a community character system is
<br />essential if a community is to achieve inten-
<br />tional outcomes. While land use and density
<br />are considerations byway of their influences
<br />on traffic, parking, and utility capacity, they
<br />are poor surrogates for character. Instead, it
<br />is how the use is designed and density is ap-
<br />plied that determines its character. By using
<br />community character to organize develop-
<br />c) (Left) Drug store,
<br />urban context
<br />(Right) Drug store,
<br />auto -urban context
<br />A
<br />Bret C. Keast, AICP - Iii' 7 G; i laborative, a national plan -
<br />ning firm with of ces id = icag. =, :ar an , exas; Renver; Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin;
<br />and Sacramento, Cali ' gigtii } - Ke "' I d more 20 years' experience with a regional planning
<br />commission, municipality, : tanning and design firm before forming his
<br />has
<br />partnership with Lane Ken: consulted local and county governments
<br />the m rehensive the United States in ehensive and small area planning, zon-
<br />ing and land development array of other studies and master plans.
<br />Keast received his Bachelor unity and Regional Planning from Iowa
<br />State University and his M asterofU ing from the University of Kansas. He is a
<br />frequent speaker at national, state, and-local planning conferences. He is co- author of
<br />Community Character, Principles for Design and Planning and A Practical Guide to Plan-
<br />ning for Community Character (Island Press) and "Meeting Procedures and Liability Issues
<br />for Public Officials," published in the Guide to Urban Planning in Texas Communities.
<br />The author extends his appreciation to Lane Kendig, Gary Mitchell, Todd Messenger, and
<br />Elizabeth Austin for their help and contributions to this article.
<br />ment, better land -use and regulatory strate-
<br />gies may be formed and measures may be
<br />established to ensure deliberate outcomes.
<br />The Premise
<br />Simply, community character is rooted in the
<br />premise that the same or similar land uses
<br />may be designed to meet a number of dif-
<br />ferent character types. This is done by using
<br />landscaping, street design, lotting patterns,
<br />and the arrangement and amount of open
<br />space — together with land use and density —to
<br />create the desired character. In each case, if
<br />designed in context, land use does not neces-
<br />sarily disrupt or even determine development
<br />character. While the focus of this article is on
<br />residential development, Illustrative 1 depicts
<br />a relevant application of community character
<br />in a nonresidential context. In this illustration,
<br />the use is the same but the character is much
<br />different by way of the building scale, position,
<br />ILLUSTRATIVE 11 SIMILAR USE, DIFFERENT CHARACTER:
<br />Same use in urban and auto -urban settings (Valparaiso, Indiana)
<br />and orientation; provisions for parking; and
<br />its site design. In the same way, this use could
<br />also be designed to reflect a suburban charac-
<br />ter with increased open space and vegetation
<br />and different building and site standards.
<br />Illustrative 2 on page 4 demonstrates that
<br />land use, lot size, and density are equally irrele-
<br />vant as independent measures of character. The
<br />small -lot, single- family dwellings (left) are three
<br />times more dense than the detached single -
<br />family dwellings (right), yet the neighborhood
<br />shown on the left is perceived to be more rural
<br />in character. This goes against conventional
<br />wisdom to those (professionals and laypersons
<br />alike) who have been conditioned or uninten-
<br />tionally trained to think of increased density as
<br />being less desirable. Again, it is a multitude of
<br />design factors that relate to character.
<br />Community character is based on a rela-
<br />tive balance of design elements. This means
<br />that, within reason, development may have
<br />ZONINGPRACTICE 12.10
<br />AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION jpage 3
<br />
|