|
Both new and old municipal surveys show that most tenants
<br /> occupying in-town housing units are either young professionals
<br /> or empty nesters who want to avoid the commute from
<br /> suburbia. In addition, many artists and entrepreneurs want to
<br /> be close to the core of the entertainment district and the busier
<br /> parts of town. New urbanist planners have long believed that in-
<br /> town housing would sell itself and that the commercial market
<br /> would soon follow. The State of the Cities 1).98, a publication of
<br /> the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
<br /> reports that the rate of homeownership in inner cities is the
<br /> highest in the past 15 years.
<br /> If it is clear why people want to reside downtown, planners
<br /> still face the questions of what makes downtown housing the
<br /> catalyst for other development, and how it becomes a reality.
<br /> Although downtown housing is a valuable component of
<br /> redevelopment, the selling point is the mixture of residential,
<br /> commercial, open space, and entertainment uses in close
<br /> proximity. Many elements must come into play to produce a
<br /> successful transformation and for people to want to relocate.
<br /> Downtowns must first make people feel comfortable and secure
<br /> through such measures as adding more bicycle and foot patrol
<br /> police, improving street lighting, and enacting design standards
<br /> that use Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
<br /> concepts. Some zoning changes may also become necessary.
<br /> Central business districts have been zoned for mixed use since
<br />the inception of Euclidean zoning, but the revival of housing
<br />development renewed interest in downtowns and their layout.
<br />Rezoning may not be necessary in some older cities that already
<br />allow residential developments ir/an area predominantly
<br />occupied by commercial and Light industrial uses, bur other issues
<br />such as height and bulk restrictions, parking, and appearance can
<br />still cause concern. Zoning tools such as planned unit
<br />developments (PUDs) and performance zoning can be used to
<br />smoothly integrate residential and commercial uses within the
<br />same zone. PUDs can be considered minizones within a larger
<br />zoned area. A PUD has its own specific guidelines within a given
<br />development or area that may include different parking and
<br />design standards or density regulations. Dayton, Ohio,
<br />implemented PUDs to create more flexible zoning for its
<br />downtown housing. Developers sometimes find PUDs attractive
<br />because they allow uses that typically would not be permitted in
<br />the zone where they wish to build.
<br /> Performance standards or performance-based zoning can
<br />ensure the compatibility of uses within a zone. An ordinance
<br />can use performance standards to restrict noise, the weight of
<br />vehicles, outside storage, and parking. These standards can also ·
<br />regulate the height and bulk of structures to limit the
<br />development density of properties and the shadows cast on
<br />adjacent properties and rights-of-way, and to assure
<br />compatibility with nearby structures.
<br /> Downtowns often have a wealth, of historic structures that
<br />were once used for manufacturing or storage. These buildings are
<br />the future housing stock for the inner city. They are typically
<br />more expensive to renovate nor only because of their age, but also
<br />because of the strict regulations and procedures that must be
<br />followed. If a building has been officially recognized as a historic
<br />structure, stringent restoration guidelines must be followed to
<br />ensure that the building maintains its original character. Most
<br />down town housing consists of adaptive reuses of old structures.
<br />Many historic reusable structures are of terra cotta or built in the
<br />Victorian style and are hard to duplicate. Refurbishing a building
<br />to resemble its original character can be more costly than
<br />building an entirely new structure.
<br />
<br /> Downtown Population Growth, 1998-2010
<br />
<br /> 2010 Project Percentage
<br />City Current Downtown~ Downtown2 Change
<br />
<br />Houston 2,374 9,574 303.3%
<br />Cleveland 6,400 21,000 228.1
<br />Donver '3,480 (1991) 9,250 165.8
<br />Memphis 6,210 14,000 -125.4
<br />SeoltJe . 15,236 (1997) 33,600 120.5
<br />Miami 17,065 (1997) 33,420 95.8
<br />Dallas 3,486 6,429 84.4 -
<br />New York3 19,473 35,000 79.7
<br />AuslJn 9,555 14,804 54.9
<br />Columbus 3,800 5,800 52.6
<br />Portland 10,315 14,694 42.5
<br />Milwaukee 9,900 13,500 36.4
<br />Chicago 115,341 152,295 32.0
<br />St. Louis 7,860 10,360 31.8
<br />Philadelphia 75,000 85,000 13.3
<br />San Antonio 20,910 23,600 12.9
<br />Boston 21,625 (1990) 23,580 9.0
<br />Baltimore 13,800 (1995) ' 14,600 5.8
<br />Del~oit 32,920 (1995) 34,753 ' 5.6
<br />Los Angeles 26,600 (1996) 27,000 1.5
<br />Atlanta 13,257 (1997) 10,674 -19.5
<br />
<br />Reprinted with permission from Urban La~dMagaz~ne, October 1998~ published by Ibc Urban Land
<br />Institute, 1025 Thoma$ Jefferson St., N.W., Suite 500W, Washington, DC 20007-5201.
<br />
<br />Financing
<br />Financing the reuse or development of downtown housing was
<br />the biggest obstacle cities had to overcome. Modernizing old
<br />structures to meet current codes while maintaining their historic
<br />appearance can be very cosily. X,Vhen city leaders decided to
<br />convert old buildings into residential lofts, private and public
<br />leaders pondered whether the benefit outweighed the cost. Since
<br />in-town housing was used as a tool to stimulate the downtown
<br />economy, cities were determined to make it work. The most
<br />common practice used for redeveloping blighted areas is tax
<br />increment financing (TIF). Cities also find creative methods to
<br />provide tax incentives for interested investors.
<br /> TIF is commonly used to improve blighted areas and is the
<br />most common tool for infill and downtown housing. In "The
<br />ABCs of TIF" (July 1998), Lolita Sereleas wrote, '% TIF district
<br />captures the tax capacity of the properties located within the
<br />specified area. For the duration of the district, property taxes
<br />that result from increases in the tax level above the level of a
<br />designated year are placed in a special fund ~hat can be used
<br />only to finance the public project cost." Because TIF uses the
<br />taxes generated from new developnYent, no money is spent from
<br />the city's general revenue. Ifsucces~l, a TIF district creates a
<br />snowball effect, and private investm, ent follows. At that point,
<br />other financing tools can come into play.
<br />
<br />Transit-Oriented Design
<br />Parking continues to be a sticky topic. Planners don't want to
<br />grant any more space for parking development on valuable land,
<br />and developers insist that people will not shop, or live where
<br />they can't park. Shifting the emphasis to mass transit is a
<br />solution that can please both sides. In Portland, Oregon,
<br />
<br />
<br />
|