1.  Before World War II, urban planning was based on the pedestrian. Through logical planning based on the ideal that one can walk or take mass transit to any of his daily needs. Public investment in infrastructure was in the form of streetcars, subways, trains etc.

2.  After World War II, urban planning became based on the automobile. Government policy and racial undertone pushed the population out of the central city into the suburbs. The mixes of uses in the central city became segmented where people lived in one area, shopped in another, and worked in another. The car was required to travel these distances. Public investment, especially from the federal government, was devoted mainly to highways and roads.

3.  A new paradigm emerged called New Urbanism that sought to bring back the ideals of traditional urbanism.  When introduced, the environment was such that New Urbanism could not break into mainstream thinking in urban planning.  They found someone who saw the value and the Founders of this movement designed the now famous Seaside, Florida. New Urbanism is currently fighting to get past the impression that it is elitist and nostalgic. 

5.  Now, to get past that impression is to understand that traditional urbanism can fix existing downtowns and bring smart, dense development to the suburbs. Take the concepts of urbanism and apply them to these markets.

6.  How can these concepts be incorporated into the suburbs?  Changing the mindset of everyone involved.  Educating city leaders, civic leaders and residents, making them understand that if they keep embracing the suburban model, they will be passed by nearby cities who more proactively embrace traditional urban concepts.

7.  Who incorporates them?  It takes like-minded developers, planners, architects and receptive, educated city leaders.  Developers must use political will to make city leaders grasp that, in the long view, this is the way to plan their growth.

8.  A project in Naperville, Illinois is exactly an example of this urbanization of a suburb. The project’s aim is to add density and expand the existing vibrant, yet small downtown to include another district that includes great buildings on great streets and a plaza.  We met initial resistance from the establishment, but currently nearly all are convinced.  In the end, this project will be of great benefit to the community.

9.  A project in Northern Indiana is an example of an infill project that turned momentum for a depressed downtown.  The City had plans to demolish this block of historic buildings to make way for new development.  Now, the buildings are being adapted to new uses and starting to bring people back to the Downtown. 

In cities such as Houston, Chicago and Los Angeles suburban sprawl forces people to live further and further from the city center. This sprawl forces people to drive long distances to their jobs, increasing traffic and greenhouse gas pollution. It also does not help those people feel happy to be in their cars for so long each day.

Good urban planning, attractive architecture and traditional city design helps people feel more comfortable living in the city center. When people feel comfortable living in cities, they live in dense enough populations that environment-friendly institutions such as public transit can flourish. When people live near where they work, they don’t have to drive, or drive as far as they would if they lived in the suburbs.

Good urban planning can therefore help us help ourselves. Housing types such as wall-sharing townhouses conserve energy because houses lose less heat and cool through their walls into the outside spaces. When houses share walls they in effect share heating and cooling expenditures, they don’t lose heat into the outside air.

Traditional neighborhood development and urban design advocates mixed use development, which combines residential and retail space in close proximity. This proximity, like people living near where they work, also cuts down on fossil fuel use and greenhouse gases. When someone doesn’t have to drive to the store to pick up groceries, or shop for whatever they need, without driving, it cuts down on exhaust and fuel use.

Finally, good urban design makes people happier and more able to live long and healthy lives. Living in dense urban areas encourages walking, which has obvious health benefits, as well as mental benefits. When people are out walking on the streets, sitting on their porches or enjoying public parks, it encourages socialization, getting to know ones neighbors and keeps the streets safe for everyone.

At some point in the near future, the sprawl of car-based development will have to stop as the world confronts rising gas prices and rising infrastructure costs. This is a study to redevelop two existing suburban shopping centers into a mixed use neighborhood, while still maintaining part of the existing shopping center.

All information based on four story buildings consisting of mixed use, townhouse, or condo functions with three interior block parking decks located within the new neighborhood. Within this new neighborhood, one has access to a wide variety of daily amenities, including a large scale grocery store, a cleaners, a hardware store, etc.

For more information and images, click here

Existing Aerial Photo

Existing Nolli Plan

Proposed Nolli Plan

Proposed Site Plan, Rendered

Neighborhoods can be planned to make it possible to walk to any everyday destination within a fifteen-minute walk. This proximity of amenities is achieved by incorporating zoning that requires a certain density with mixed uses. The availability of public transportation is key to creating cities with great pedestrian-based neighborhoods. If public transportation is available, people will then be able to utilize public transportation to go to work in the larger commercial center or to another destination in the city.

In general, pedestrian-based neighborhoods are able to provide a full range of services in a relatively small area, thus creating more space for more-defined green areas of nature. Large cities can be made up of several neighborhoods, or “nodes”, that are all comprehensively planned out.

Chicago is a great example of this: a large city with many pedestrian-based neighborhoods with large reliance on public transportation. You can go to most everywhere in Chicago via public transportation. Today’s continued success of the original Chicago urban plan is a testament to the logic of pedestrian-based planning.

Automobile-based city planning is based on the principle that since we have cars, and people enjoy having cars, we should create cities that utilize them. In area with this sort of planning, there are strict single-use zoning requirements, which stemmed from an overreaction from wanting residential uses separated from industrial uses. While this is a worthy goal, we are not in the Industrial Revolution anymore.

This creates distance from residential areas of the city to the commercial areas of the city. Distance mandates the use of a car, and with more cars comes more congestion. The solution to this problem, unfortunately, is to add more highways. Many cities, including Boston and Milwaukee, are bucking this false solution to traffic congestion by actually tearing down highways.

Along with the single-use zoning requirements, there are also strict parking requirements for commercial uses. This stems from the planning put forth is designed for the car, not the human. Because of these requirements, land gets eaten up with no reasonable means to control it. Because this type of planning is not “node-based”, with no defined edge, nature is disregarded.

What this planning says is that everyone has a right to a car, which is the prevailing thought of everyone who HAS a car. Everyone is affected by city planning, but not everyone can afford to buy a car. This creates a situation where the “have-nots” are given a further disadvantage. We were given feet at birth, but not everyone is given a car on their sixteenth birthday.

In the long history of the Olympic Games, cities have transformed themselves to put on the world’s largest sporting event. While the Games last two weeks, these transformations last for decades. Often times, specifically in the 20th century, what is left of the built environment designed and constructed for the Olympics does not maintain its luster. It is a vexing problem: how do you create something that is to thrill for two weeks and then be adapted for a hundred years?

Chicago has an opportunity to host the 2016 Summer Olympic Games. Many observers in the city have seen as a chance for Chicago to become a true “world city”. How can the urban planning and architecture that serves for the Games be adapted to what Chicagoans will live with for a hundred years?

First, the planning must be in keeping with what has been successful thus far. Time-tested traditions of pedestrian-based neighborhoods with solid density will not just serve as infrastructure for the Olympics, but for the city for decades. Chicago’s numerous neighborhoods, planned in the 19th century, continue to provide everything its residents need day-to-day. Also, the Olympics are a great opportunity to solve the ever-present problem of a lack of variety in housing. Chicago has a great opportunity in having an extraordinary amount of open space / vacant land in the city limits. Creating a more suburban environment, (car based), with this land would be a disservice to the history of the city. Just because we have more the space does not mean we should not build dense, pedestrian based neighborhoods in which its habitants can enjoy streets, gardens, and parks.

Second, the architecture of the Olympic Village must have a sense of permanence and sustainability. For every successful Olympic Village, there is one that after a few short years looks outdated and irrelevant. The architecture should reflect the great tradition of building we have in Chicago. To turn our backs to over a hundred years of tradition by designing trendy architecture would be a disservice to our strong tradition of architecture.

In the planning, we must take into consideration all income types in designing the Olympic Village. The Games are about amateurs, and to create something that is only for the wealthy would be against the basic philosophy of the Games. Creating accessible architecture would create a sense of community that the Games are all about.

In the 20th century, Chicago’s urban planning was defined by the failed experiment of large-scale public housing projects. Now is the time to learn from our mistakes, not be taken by trendy planning ideas, and create sustainable development that will both inspire for the Olympics and last for a hundred years.