|
Austin, Texas, Special Use Infill Options
<br />and Design Tools
<br />In zoio Austin developed eight different
<br />infill districts and corresponding regula-
<br />tions. As in other cities, the tools focus on
<br />residential infill; however, they also include
<br />three categories with commercial uses:
<br />neighborhood mixed use building, the cor-
<br />ner store, and neighborhood urban center.
<br />Neighborhood residents then vote to incor-
<br />porate one or more of the desired categories
<br />into their neighborhood plans.
<br />CONCLUSION
<br />While infill studies typically focus on land
<br />use and transportation performance, this
<br />article adds another dimension: livability
<br />where new density meets the neighbor-
<br />hoods. Many concerns raised by neighbor-
<br />hoods are legitimate and, when handled
<br />from the first stages of planning, can be
<br />prevented or mitigated through design and
<br />policy.
<br />At present, most resources on design
<br />and policy options are scattered. A compre-
<br />hensive resource would include a search-
<br />able database by type of impact, location,
<br />and development context. This information
<br />could be crowdsourced (having users con-
<br />tribute content) and distributed through
<br />social networks, websites, and print. This
<br />database could include photos of design
<br />and architectural "tricks" used to enhance
<br />compatibility; examples of site plans; zon-
<br />ing code language and design guidelines
<br />for neighborhood edges and infill housing;
<br />language for stipulations and use permits;
<br />innovative language from developer agree-
<br />ments; practices to limit impacts from con-
<br />struction; model policies for park design,
<br />tree canopy, and parking; and success
<br />stories on how developers, planners, and
<br />neighbors came together.
<br />This resource would also collect best
<br />practices for local approaches to civic en-
<br />gagement. It would include methods for
<br />engaging the most affected neighbors; use
<br />of new models and technology (such as
<br />computer renderings, visualization tools,
<br />and use of smart phone/tablet apps to show
<br />how a project looks in situ); important local
<br />data; identifying locally relevant manage-
<br />ment practice; and running effective char-
<br />rettes and workshops.
<br />REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
<br />Arlington County, Virginia, Columbia Pike
<br />www.columbiapikeva.us
<br />Austin, Texas, Special Use Infill Options and Design Tools
<br />ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/npzd/Austingo/infill tools.pdf
<br />Barrie, Ontario, Intensification Area Urban Design Guidelines, Public Open House, April 27, 2011
<br />www.barrie.ca/City%2oHall/growth/Documents/11o427 BarrieUDGWorkshop.pdf
<br />Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
<br />www.cpted.net
<br />Emeryville, California, Stormwater Guidelines for Green, Dense Redevelopment
<br />www.epa.gov/dced/emeryville.htm
<br />Eugene, Oregon, Infill Compatibility Standards
<br />www.eugene-or.gov/infi'll
<br />Goldberg, David. 2oo4. Choosing Our Community's Future. Washington, D.C.:
<br />Smart Growth America.
<br />www.smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/SGAguidebookFinal.pdf
<br />Idaho Smart Growth, Creating Quality Infill
<br />http://idahosmartgrowth.org/index. php/projects/project/creating_quality_in fi71
<br />Lathrop, California, Traffic Calming Report
<br />www.ci.lathrop.ca.us/pwd/documents/TrafficCalmingReport.pdf
<br />Madison, Wisconsin, Design Guidelines and Criteria for Preservation, Williamson Street
<br />www.cityofmadison.com/planning/DesignStandardsBookFinal%2o4.pdf
<br />Minneapolis Central Corridor Funders Collaborative
<br />www.funderscollaborative.org
<br />Portland, Oregon, Infill Design
<br />www.portlandonline.com/bps/infill
<br />Raleigh, North Carolina, Unified Development Ordinance
<br />www.raleighnc.gov/business/content/PlanCurrent/Articles/NewRaleighCode.html
<br />San Diego Affordable Housing Parking Study
<br />www.sandiego.gov/planning/programs/transportation/mobility/affordpark.shtml
<br />The author thanks Tom Miller (Arlington,
<br />Virginia), Dan Parolek (Berkeley, California),
<br />Toby Millman (Skaneateles, New York), Lee
<br />Sobel (Washington, D.C.), Patricia Thomas
<br />(Eugene, Oregon), and Neal Payton (Los
<br />Angeles) for assistance and graphics.
<br />ed by Renaissance Planning Group for
<br />rg, Virginia; design concept by Lisa Barton'
<br />VOL. 29, NO. 8
<br />Zoning Practice is a monthly publication of the American Planning Association. Subscriptions are
<br />available for $95 (U.S.) and $12o (foreign). W. Paul Farmer, FAICP, Chief Executive Officer; William R.
<br />Klein, AICP, Director of Research
<br />Zoning Practice (ISSN 1548-0135) is produced at APA. Jim Schwab, AICP, and David Morley, AICP, Editors;
<br />Julie Von Bergen, Assistant Editor; Lisa Barton, Design and Production.
<br />Missing and damaged print issues: Contact Customer Service, American Planning Association, 205 N.
<br />Michigan Ave., Suite 1zoo, Chicago, IL 606o1(312-431-9100 or customerservice@planning.org) within
<br />90 days of the publication date. Include the name of the publication, year, volume and issue number or
<br />month, and your name, mailing address, and membership number if applicable.
<br />Copyright ©aolz by American Planning Association, zo5 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 1zoo, Chicago, IL
<br />606o1-5927. The American Planning Association also has offices at 1030 15th St., NW, Suite 75o West,
<br />Washington, DC z0005-1503; www.planning.org.
<br />All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any
<br />means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and
<br />retrieval system, without permission in writing from the American Planning Association.
<br />Printed on recycled paper, including 50-70% recycled fiber and io% postconsumer waste.
<br />ZONINGPRACTICE 8.12
<br />AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION Ipage 7
<br />
|