tr -Brl - rAm - NCModernist

Urban Design in Action tr -BrlrAm-

Urhan Design in Action

Peter Batcheloq David lewis, Editors

The history, theory and development of theAmerican Institute of Architects'Regional/Urban Design Assistance Teams

Program (R/UDAT).

Volume 79,1985.The Student Publication of the School of DesignNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleigh, North Carolina

copyright O 1986 by

The American Institute of Architects and

The Student Publication of the School of Design.

reproduced, stored in a reuieval system, ortransmitted in any form by any means without priorwritten permission of the publishers.

Published in the United States of America by

The Student Publication of the School of Design

at Nonh Carolina State University;Raleigh, North Carolina, in cooperation withThe American Institute of Architects.

ISBN 0-9t3962.80-5

Library of Congress/AlA Catalogue #: R354

C-over illustration bv John Desmond.

Dedicated to the memory ofJules Gregory FAIA, 1970-1985

Who challenged tlrc architectural profession to expand.

irs responsibility beyonl tlw design of indtvidwlbuihings and to assume alealership role in enlwncingtlle comprellensiue Enlity of hf, in our cities.

Credits:

Editors:

Peter Batchelor, AIA/AICPProfessor of Urban DesignNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleigh, North Carolina

David Lewis, EAIA/AICP/RIBAPartner, Urban Design AssociatesPittsburgh, Pennsylvannia

Contributors:

Charles Brewer, AIA, Columbus, OhioJohn Clarke, AIA, Tienton New JerseyBen Cunningham, AIA, Houston, Gxas

John Gaillard, AICP, Vashington, D.C.

Jules Gregory FAIA, Princeton, New Jersey

John Kriken, AlA, San Fransisco, CalifomiaCharles Redmon, EAIA, Cambridge,Massachusetts

Ronald Straka, EAIA, Denver, Colorado

The above named were members of theRegionallUrban Design Assistance Team Thsk

Group of the Urban Design and PlanningCommittee within the American lnstitute ofArchitects. This task group was charged withassembling material which eventually became thebasis of this book.

This book was made possible by a grant fromThe Design Arts Program ofThe National Endowment of the Arts.

Contents

Foreword

Section One furspectives:History, Theory and Development /David Lewis, Editor

t The History of'an tdea 3Genesis. 4What is a R/UDAT? 5A new kind of urban design takes shape. /0

2 R/UDAT How it Works 17

Growth of an idea. lBToday's R/UDAT. 18

R/UDAT's impact on urban design. 22R/UDAT's three ingredients. 22

3 Urban Form and Structure 25City as art. 26Determinants of urban form. 30Grids. 31The character of grid cities. 33The block as the key social unit. 35Urban structure: the language ofdemocracy. 38Civil rights: a turning point formodern,American cities. 41

4 Urban Design in Practice 45Civic design versu.s people design. 46Public process in private practice. 50The first schools to be designed in open publicprocess were built at the timeof the firsr R/UDAT in Rapid City. 52Private practice architects openstore-front service. 54Shirt Sleeve mayors, T-shirt bankers. 59New ways of listening and responding. 6/Conclusion: people-made places. 62

5 Urban Design: A Developing Tradition 69Urban design and public interest. 70Urban design and architecture: form respondingto participation. 7l

6 Process, Partnerships and thePublic Sector 75Public management. 76Process. 76Partnerships. 77The public sector. 77The development process. 77Government. 78The community sector. 80The prlvate sector. 82

7 Urban Design Education 85The professions. 86Urban design: an evolving skill. BBHow R/UDAT affects private practrce. 92Urban design: an institutional skill. /0/Urban design and the schools ofarchitecture. lOSEducating government. /06

8 Synthesis l//Urban design is architecture. 172

Section Two Regional/Urban Design Assistance Teamsin Action Case Studies /17Peter Batchelor, Editor

The Teams in Action: An Assessrnent 7/9General structure and problem-solvingprocess of a RUDAT visit.Generation and communicatlon of idea'scritical dimensions of the creative process.

Case Studies: 137Denver, Colarado /39Wilson, North Carolina 153Lynn, Massachusetts 17/Seattle, Washington /89Birmingham, Alabama 209Healdsburg, California 2 25Olympia, Washington 239

Appendix: Chronology of R/UDATs1967-1985 254

Foreword

No one can doubt that our cities are in desperate

need of help. Even those cities that we regard as

the jewels of our culture have problems of many

different kinds. From large and beautiful cities likeSan Fransisco and Washington, D.C. to small NewEngland mill towns nestling peacefully beside fast

running streams in wooded valleys, there seem tobe no exceptions.

Some problems are national, and all of our citiesare affected by them. Others are particular andlocal. But whether local or national, they are allintensely real to the the people who are affected

by them. Usually one finds that a problem does

not exist on its own, but is a part of the entirenetwork of economic social and physicalproblems: unemployment; industries made

obsolete by technological change; a declining taxbase; the exodus of the talented young, and a loss

of pride. On the other hand such negatives are

just as often counterbalanced by the courage anddetermination of citizens and local govemment totum the tide and make their cities better, to strivefor new goals-if only they knew how to definethem, how to design them realistically, and how totum them into action.

Urban Design in Action is the documentation of arecord of achievement by professional assistance

teams who answer to appeals for help from ourcities. Called Regional/Urban Design AssistanceGams, or R/UDATs, they began in 1967 inresponse to a citizen's chance perception that theAmerican Institute of Architects could helpresolve the problems of his community. The firstteam discovered that the city is a living organism,embodying within prototypical problems the localculture, history and aspirations of its citizens.They sensed its continual evolution, from past tofuture forms. Most of all, they realized that thecitizens wanted to help shape their own destinies,to participate in the formulation of policies whose

implementation would result in a new sense ofcommunity.

Since the formation of that first team, more thaneighty R/UDAG have been conducted on citiesthroughout the United States. Hundreds ofprofessionals drawn from the design and planningfields have volunteered tens of thousands of hoursto the cause of building liveable communities.These professionals all have in common: a love forcities, a belief in their future, and a determinationto help the citizens of each urban communtiyarticulate their goals and participate in the job ofmaking urban environments better and moresatisfiring Places to live in.

Over time the R/UDAT process evolved into itscuffent mode of operation: a methodology ofinterdisciplinary problem definition andresolution in which the existing city's contextsprovide all the elements from which the image ofthe cities future must take its shape.Consequently, RIUDAI teams are drawn from a

national pool of specialists-men and women whoare emminent in their field and who represent, inhuman terrns, the broad range of skills and

resources needed to analyze the city's issues and

to prcpose solutions to particular prcblems.

The book is divided into two parts. The first sets

the contexts in which urban design operates. Thesecond provides case studies of typical R/UDAGand their products. In the first part the R/UDAIprocess is explained, followed by descriptions ofthe structure and form of American cities, theimpact of urban design on architectural andplanning practice, how govemment and theprivate sector can work together to make ourcities better, and urban design education inarchitecture and planning schools. The secondpart describes typical R/UDATs and defines

universal themes affecting the redevelopment ofAmerican cities. An appendix contains a deuileddescription of the R/UDAf, process.

Bom in an atmosphere of urban crisis in thesixties, the growing and deepening impact ofurban dorgn is one of the most excitingdevelopments in recent yean in architecture andrelated professions, brrngrng new enlightenmentand dedication to the people of our cities. Thecivil rights movement taught us to listen, and tohear those whose voices had gone unheard forgenerations. The bicentennial taught us to see inour cities a history and tradition that is strong anduniquely American. R/UDAT has taught us howto tum the aspirations of citizens, and theirdescriptions of urban value, into action.

Peter Batchelor, David Irwis

Section OnePerspectives:History, Theory and DevelopmentDavlcl Lcwr:s, Edrtor

1 The History of an ldea

1[lE$ffi

frfl/rl _(

-t'l )

it rtatfrF ri,N *

*,,{^I

trIFF/Llr

4tn.n/

Genesis One day early in 1967 , James BelI, President of theRapid City, South Dakota, Chamber ofCommerce, was in Washington for a meeting ofthe U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He had a littletime and he had something on his mind. So hestopped at the headquarters of the AmericanInstitute of Architects to visit with Andy Euston,then Director of Urban Programs. Mr. Bell, apracticing engineeq had a keen interest in whatmakes cities work and a deep dedication to hishome town. He recalls that at the AIA that day

there happened to be others present from theUrban Design and Planning Committee.

His question: "ls there anything you architects cando to help us with some very serious problems we

have in Rapid City?" He articulated what a few ofthose problems were. After some intense talk thearchitects made a suggestion. They offered togather a small group of experienced professionals

to go to Rapid City as volunteers and confer withlocal govemment officials and citizens on site, ifRapid City were to put together enough funds topay their expenses. That sounded prettyreasonable to Mr. Bell. He promised to carry theidea back home and see what kind ofresponse it produced.

The first R/UDATSoon after Mr. Bell's visit to lVashington a formalrequest for an assistance team came to the AIAfrom the Rapid City Chamber of Commerce. TheUrban Planning and Design Committee met and avisit was committed.

Four team members, two architects and twoplanners were selected, and a packet of maps,

aerial photos, statistics and other backgroundinformation about Rapid City was sent to each.The three-day visit occurred in June.

The team met with the Mayor and Council. Theyalso met with local architects, the media and key

citizens. They tried to keep their meetingsinformal, and to hear all sides of the various issues

that were raised. And they reviewed the data aboutRapid City in the light of what they heard. At theend of their visit they made a verbal presentationof their findings. A week or so later they mailed toRapid City a brief written report andrecommendations. Their expenses

came to $900.

The results, over time, were powerful. A planningcommission was established with one of the localarchitects as a member. The city hired a full-timeplanner and engaged a consultant to help. Citizensand officials became aware of the issues andleamed to debate them jointly as part of theplanning process. Everyone who was involved -including the visiting team-came to see in a few

short and crowded days that the community, witha modicum of stimulus and help from the outside,had resources within it that it could leam tohamess in the public interest. Business people,citizens and govemment joined forces for the firsttime. Indeed, it took the group of outsiders totrigger that result.

Urban Design ln Action

Back at the AIA, the architectural community wasastonished and gratified. The value of the process

was clear to the Urban Planning and DesignCommittee. It decided to offer the idea to othercommunities. And R/UDAT was bom.

what is a R/UDAT? R/UDAT is the acronym for a cumbersome andunmemorable official title: Regional and UrbanDesign Assistance Gams. (And it is as

unmemorable to be told that this official titlederives from the two AIA national committees-the Regional Planning Committee and the UrbanPlanning and Design Committee- which sharedresponsibility for the program when it first gotstarted.) Bur the acronym is rapidly becoming a

word in our language: "Roodat"!

Well then, what's so significant aboutR/UDAT that justifies a book?Because by sending teams to urban communitiesthat request them (there have now been overeighty) the AIA has done something for cities thatno other professional body has ever done. And inthe process, the success of these teams has deeplyaffected the way urban communities haveperceived their capacity to generate change fromwithin, and has also deeply affected the way

architecture is taught and practiced.

The first R/UDAT in its national contextFirst, let's see Rapid City in its historical setting.Rapid City's R/UDAf occurred almost 20 years

ago. That was the high noon of urban renewal.Suburbs were expanding. New urban growth was atthe edges of cities large and small, fingering out

into the open countryside. Everyone who couldafford to in the 1950's and 60's moved outwards,particularly young college-educated families. Carsand gas were cheap. Highways and interchangeswere under construction. New strip shoppingcenters, the forerunners of today's enclosed malls,were steadily draining out the strengths oftraditional downtowns. And offices and lightindustry had begun moving to suburbanindustrial parks.

6 Thenty-five years ago the flight from cities was notmerely a geographic migration. It was a flight from

origins. Young people, especially, tumed theirbacks on the ethnic pasts of their parents andgrandparents, choosing a new future as suburbanAmericans. The architectural language of the new

suburban schools, offices and industries, sited onwide lawns with neat parking areas landscaped

with trees, was of bright technological tomorrows,

spacious, open and optimistic. And those who

were left behind in the older neighborhoods were

most often the folk who couldnt afford to move,

the old, the minorities, the unskilled, the poor.

And the cure for the problem areas of the innercity was to declare them blighted and to demolishthem, leaving churches without congregations and

cities with declining tax bases to maintain theirstreets, parks, hospitals, libraries, utilitiesand services.

-trc'?

*'.{cflf--^-rrff

fa l.-

_'_t..

Urban Design in Action

'lbday the mood has changed so much that it ishard to believe now how many politicians anddepartment heads at the national level weredeclaring, a mere two decades ago, that the oldand traditional city was dead and that newdecentralized urban forms would replace it.Metropolitan growth was seen as radial extensionsalong highways like the spokes of a wheel.Forecasts of urban growth showed these linealextensions of metropoli becoming linked to formurban corridors. Two well known studies in thesixties ihowed megalopolitian corridors linking

s/tTstr

Boston, Providence, New York, Philadelphia,Baltimore and Washington in a northeast coasralsystem, and the other showed Chicago, Detroit,Toledo, Cleveland, Erie and Buffalo in a great lakessystem. The traditional centers of cities wereperceived as "islands of excellence'!-commutercores of high density office towers reached bylimited access high speed highways and rapidtransit lines. Along the radials were suburbannodes - decentralized office and industrial parks,and shopping centers. Under urban renewal theolder residential areas of the center city would becleared and would become building sites for theexpansion of high density cores or park land.

I The History of an ldea

I Rediscovery of the cityFortunately these forecasts have not been realized

entirely. Many historic inner-city areas were

declared blighted and demolished. Because we

know now from today's vantage-point that we

could have rehabilitated them, we moum thewaste. But enough of the older neighborhoodsremain for us to be able to work with our urban

inheritance - socially as well as physically - andgraft new urban futures on to the old historicstems. Indeed, people everywhere are beginning tofocus on our cities once again.

\Ue are rediscovering orchestras, aft museums,

universities and historic buildings. The energy

crisis of the seventies has made us realize howlimited fossil fuels are, and that alternative energy

sources must be found. Costs of family travel towork, shop, school and leisure have soared,

pafticularly for people who live in the suburbs and

commute to the city. Housing shortages have led

to a rediscovery of older in-city neighborhoods,and to the satisfactions of remodelingand gentrification.

Developers and local govemments are realizing

that rebuilding in old neighborhoods offers

economic advantages over the suburbs - because

roads, sewers, utilities, shops, schools and all theother amenities already exist. And people in ever.

increasing numbers are interested in "roots", in the

ethnic origins of our cities. Bumper stickers thatsay "Proud to be Polish"' or "lreland Forever" orsimply "[talia" are so common we hardly noticethem any more. But intense urban problems stillremain unsolved. Our cities still house the poorand the segregated. And in a world of rapidtechnological change in industry the problems ofunemployed men and women who lack thetechnical skills for the new employment marketsare intense and real.

The birth of a new urban conciousnessThe Rapid City R/UDAf occurred ar a moment ofgreat historical importance for cities. The civilrights movement was really gathering momentum.1968 was the year of the long hot summer. Martinllther King, Jr., was assassinated: and bumings,lootings and riots broke out in the black ghettos ofseveral cities including Detroit, Chicago,Pittsburgh and \DTashington, D.C. Perhaps theracial riots in Washington, the nation's capitol,was the biggest surprise, cutting to the quick. Andan unexpected cry arose from the slums andghettos: "black is beautiful".

Urban design was still in its infancy in the UnitedStates. The words were not a phrase in ourvocabulary the way they are today. If anyonethought about urban design at all, it was taken tomean the formal beaux arts design of civic spaces."lnterior decoration in the rain" was the way

someone characterized it. Certainly it was notgeared to grapple with the social, economic andpolitical forces that underlay the urban problemsthat erupted in American cities in 1967.

In contrast with later R/UDAG, which becamemuch more sophisticated as a result of dealinghead-on with these difficult and highlycontentious issues in more complex cities, theRapid City R/UDAf was small and primitive,faraway, and in light of cuffent events patentlylacking in consequence. But as things tumed out,Rapid City was far from lacking in consequence. [ttaught a revealing and basic lesson.

/ The History of an ldea

10 A new kind of urbandesign takes shape

Architects, by training, measure success inphysical terrns. "Design" to the architectural worldmeans the design of physical environmentsand buildings.

It is not surpising, therefore, that virtually every

urban renewal clearance in the 1950's and 60's was

accompanied by official plans and models showing

new buildings, boulevards, parks, schools. Thegraphics were beautiful and idealistic. New

buildings stood out like sharp cubes in the sun,

surrounded by trees and grass. Cars were parked

neatly in lots, and street intersections were free ofcongestion. Usually the graphics were drawn by

architects and plannen who worked in offices thatwere remote from the sites they drew. Sometimes

these offices were even in far off cities. Indeed, thearchitects might be forgiven if their designs forthese urban renewal areas in the hearts of citiesresembled suburbs. After all the suburbs were theolder inner city's competition, and they

were successful.

Yet the civil rights movement and other liberationmovements of the late 60's and early 70's weretelling us something very different about themainsprings of design.

Design without peopleSeldom were the citizens who lived in inner citycommunities asked by the official designers whattheir perceptions and goals were. The thought thatthe inhabitants might have different values andpriorities from those of the planners andarchitects, and the govemment agencies whichhired them, did not occur to anyone. It wouldcertainly have seemed ludicrous that the citizensmight want to retain the character and density ofthe inherited city which had so clearly becomeobsolete and had failed. [t was not that the peoplein govemment or the architects were trying to becallous or dictatorial. They were doing what theythought they needed to do under thecircumstances. In a way they were like doctors,curing the city. Their designs were prescribed likemedicine. Th.y were giving the people what theyneeded, what was good for them; and the plansthey prescribed were objectively thought out interrns of public budgets, health standards, zoningregulations, demographic projections, newemployment and tax benefits. After all, in anincreasingly technological world how wouldordinary people know what the new city should belikel That's what the professionals were for.Fortunately, the plans they prescribed were seldombuilt; the few that were tended to be coldand impersonal.

t2 Design with peopleIn contrast with this way of doing things, it tumedout that the most significant achievement of theRapid City R/UDAf was not physical at all - at

least not to begin with. It lay in a different kind ofdesign: the design of public policy, arrived at

through a process of democratic exchange.

Five months after Rapid City there was a second

R/UDAT, This was in Frankfort, Kentucky, inNovember 1967. There were two more in 1968,

three in 1969, and three more in 1970. In all ofthese early R/UDATs, many of the same

characteristics recurred. \Uhen a team came totown, people who had never talked to each otherbefore, far less heard one another, began talkingand listening.

Business people, govemment PeoPle,neighborhood people, old and young, minoritiesand !UASPs, rich and poor, came to the same open

meetings to talk about their aspirations, and about

the obstacles that stood in the way of achieving

their goals. Problems were debated and from every

angle. There was no concealing any of the issues

that were important to the citizens. Someone was

bound to bring it up. And someone else was boundto dispute it, or have a different slant. Hidden

agendas ran the risk of not being hidden for

very long.

Some meetings even started by being

confrontations. But most times people could see

that confrontation was really a measure of passion.

People got a load off their chest by shouting at one

another and making accusations. But standoffs

didnt resolve anything. So meetings tended to

become discussions instead. And the discussions

began to reveal treasure troves of local inputs andperceptions. The team would leam about theissues, and about the history of local places and

buildings in an entirely new way, a way that didnot exist in books or reports, but firsthand, frompeoples voices, in open and free public exchange.

But far more importantly, the people themselvesleamed from one another about the issues in thisnew way too, and saw within each issue, each

perception, each piece of information and insight,a gist of political significance, a detailed piece inthe jigsaw of policy and consensus. Agencyrepresentatives (who after all are citizens too) were

asked to provide detailed explanations of how thisproperty came to be zoned that way, or how thatintersection will operate when it is rebuilt, or how

state and federal funding is regulated pertaining toa particular project, and through theirexplanations citizens began to understand a bitbetter the mysteries of govemment. Documents ofmany different kinds, some of which mightnormally not have seen the light of public day, orbe of particular interest if they did, became publicand gained meanings that weren't perceived

before. People spoke at these meetings who hadnever spoken publicly. As they listened to each

other speak, they became less shy about revealing

their feelings and what they had thought to be

their ignorances.

-r 13lmpact on design

And as the members of the professional team

began intensive discussions about what they had

heard and leamed, interrelationships between oneissue and another began to be apparent. One thingwould trigger another. Recommendations in one

area became linked with recommendations inanother. Networks of recommendations would be

set up, anchored solidly in local contexts. Andwhen the citizens who had participated perceived

in the team's recommendations a trueresponsiveness to their concems and inputs, localpride and commitment began to surface.

The architects and planners on these early

assistance teams noticed something aboutthemselves too. Their focus was not primarily ondesign at all, at least not in the old sense, but onmaking recommendations that affect policy. Andwhen they drew their recommendations - whichbeing architects they did more easily and naturallythan writing them - they found that they were

drawing in ways that differed from the drawings

that were done by the urban renewal planners and

by the majority of professional architects. Theirdrawings were not hardline and prescriptive

designs imposed "from above," but were tentative,exploratory sensitive and uncertain, as thoughsearching to uncover meanings. Instead ofinserting hard new buildings into old streets, orreplacing entire city blocks, they found themselvestreating urban communities like pieces of old andtreasured quilts, picking up threads of meaningand value, patching and stitching, trying to find

t?,.I#liE1ffi

fltfl'trl;r,'?),''"-'- ?E;i1\';'

i-rt'' -. -- !-- i Ii{s"PiBIEh;

the implicit, the particularity of inheritedstructure and texture anci scale, introducing new

buildings sensitively into old contexts, andeliciting new vocabulary from a sense of localplace and heritage.

And as they drew, the architects explored themeanings of their drawings with the otherprofessionals on these early R/UDAG, theeconomists, engineers, sociologists and historians.A sense began to emerge that drawings couldbecome vehicles for the whole ream workingtogether, to explore altematives and to definerecommendations, and in this way economic andsocial policies became as much part of the contenrof drawings as physical concem with local fit.

So much has changed in the past i*..rty years inthe way architecture is taught and practiced thatmuch of this can be taken for granted now. But inthe 60's and early 70's it was not. Architects andother professionals twenty years ago didn t thinkthat anything was to be gained from listening toordinary citizens. What could uneducated oruntrained people offer to a task as intellectuallysophisticated and complex as the design of cities?What could they be expected to know about realestate law or traffic engineering or developmenteconomics or the styles of historic buildings?R/UDAT has made an important contribution tothe task of bringing about this change.

\,, >.\\-{vl\\

I The History of an ldea

2 R/UDAT: How it Works

2 R/UDAT How it works

Growth of an idea looking back, it is surprising how many of theelements and essential ingredients of today's

mature R/UDAT process were present that Mayweekend in Rapid City. The team was

interprofessional. Th"y worked from a carefullydeveloped itinerary. Th.y worked with allcomponents of the community. They toured thecity, cameras, notepads and sketchbooks in hand.They recorded photographically and in thumbnaildrawings and diagrams elements that seems tothem to be symptomatic or at issue. These

recordings, in all their freshness and spontaneity,they used in developing their recommendationsand in their final presentation.

From that primitive beginning nearly twenty years

ago, R/UDAI today has grown. In the 80 or morecommunities that have now had R/UDAG, fourmillion dollars worth of professional services have

been volunteered, and more than a tenth of thenation's urban population has, in one way oranother, been affected by R/UDAG. And theprogram itself has profited with each succeedingexperience, becoming much more sophisticated.l.ogistics have been refined to enable teams tohave more creative time. Experience has developed

capacities for sensitive response to delicate localissues. In many respects R/UDAG have becomelike urban commandos.

Today's R/UDAT While the.process varies as much as thecommunities, certain elements have become fairlyconstant in each R/UDAT, Here is a brief accountof what happens.

R/UDATs arc always invitedFirst of all, a R/UDAT is never foisted on any

community. Every R/UDAT i6 invited. A team ofabout eight people comes to town drawn from allover the country. Some are old R/UDAT hands;some are on their first visit. They are fromdifferent disciplines, but all are leaders in theirfields. Th.y have been carefully selected for theircapacity to deal with the specific problems at hand

and their ability to work effectively in aninterdisciplinary setting. Th.y have been briefedwith materials which spell out the key local issues

and provide essential technical information. Theyvolunteer their time. Only their expenses are

reimbursed; and, to ensure their objectivity, theymay not accept commissions for work that results

from study recommendations. They are joined by

at least an equal number of students from nearbyschools of architecture, urban design andplanning; sometimes by more.

How A Typical R/UDAT Takes PlaceThe tearrfs four-day visit generally begins with a

physical inspection of the study areas by foot, bus,boat, helicopter. Th.y confer in a succession ofmeetings with representatives of the cityestablishment - mayor and council, planning andzoning boards, the chamber of commerce, bankingand special interests, community leaders. Theystudy background documents. On the second daythere is a town meeting, the first of two. The townmeeting is open to all interested citizens and itspurpose is to collect input from individuals andfrom the non-establishment groups -neighborhood organizations, block groups, ethnicand minority representatives. Some of the peoplewho have been heard at this first town meetingmay be asked back for more detailed one-to-onediscussions. The team gets together for worksessions. Members synthesize their experience andbegin to hammer out as a team the theoreticalbasis for their approach.

20 The bulk of the production work takes place in afinal 24-hour non-stop work session starting at

dawn on the third day. First the team sets up a

comprehensive framework for the thrust of itsrecommendations. Then each team member works

at his speciality, alone or in small groups -conceptualizing, writing, drawing - conferringwith other team members from time to time to

compare thoughts and correlate ideas. A skeleton

of a final repoft begins to surface, and as the nightwears on, the report is fleshed out in writing and

illustrations. By dawn of the fourth day a finishedbook, usually 60 to 100 pages in length, goes tothe printer and the team goes to bed. In theaftemoon there is a press conference. In theevening there is the second open town meetingwhen the team makes it presentation to thecommunity, using slides and the finished report(which has just come back from the printer in thenick of time) to illustrate its recommendations.

The R/UDAT team is thus in town for a total offour days. But organization and preparation for a

team visit often take more than a year all told, and

expenses today can exceed $20,-$25,000 generally

perceived as a small sum when it is compared withthe value of the professional input and, in many

communities, the tangible projects that are

subsequently implemented.

Preceeding a R/UDATDuring the months before the R/UDAI, the city is

visited by members of the AIAs R/UDAf Task

Group and team chairperson who conductinformational meetings to understand the issues,

and ensure that relevant backgrounddocumentation is collected and available for teammembers. A critical outcome of these preliminaryvisits is that it enables the R/UDAf Thsk Group toselect and invite the finest interdisciplinary talentsavailable from all over the country to address thespecific issues that have surfaced.

Following a R/UDATA highly organized follow-up program is also

available as part of the process. It involves follow-up team visits, which include some (but not all) ofthe original team plus some new faces. The idea isto help the community move forward with theteam's recommendations, to develop strategieswith the community on how to remove roadblocksto progress, and to make comparisons with otherRIUDATs so that the national R/UDATcommittee can leam how to make future R/UDAGmore successful.

22 R/UDAT'I impact onurban design

The impact of the RJUDAT program on thenation's cities is unequalled by any other urbandesign activity over the past decade. Noconsultant organization has worked so closely withso many communities. No govemment agency has

dealt with such a rich variety of issues. Thebreadth, quantity and quality of experiencedtalent in the R/UDAT process exists in noinstitution or in any consultant organization.

R/UDAT can therefore be considered anencapsulation of urban design. All thefundamental elements of the discipline exist inR/UDAf,, The extent and activity of this programhas not only taught us lessons for the program's

own improved operation, but has also exposed thebare bones of urban design. Almost every planningand architectural office in the nation whichpractices urban design, whether in the public orthe private domain, has been directly affected by

R/UDAf.

One: the processFirst, the process by which the effort takes place is

as important as its product. Making urbandemocracy work is a critical demonstration in theR/UDAT program as it engenders a sense thatordinary people can, and do, affect urban change.

The urban design process, as we have said earlier,must openly involve all elements in thecommunity, from the decision-making structure tothe neighborhood organization, and from the first

perceptions of goals and objectives through thedevelopment of implementation strategies. lb besuccessful, urban design must be sensitive to thepeople in the community and its physical fabric, as

well as to the culture and history of the place, itspolitical framework and the events whichproduced the existing climate. The process mustcontain feedback techniques, so that decisionsreached in one stage can be evaluated and adjustedagainst criteria established earlier. It is, in a wor,C

catalytic. It brings people together who have nevertalked to one another before, with the toughcommon goal of "getting things donel'

R/UDAT's Three Briefly, these are the three ingredients foringredients successful urban design, as revealed by the

R/UDAT experience:

Two : interdisciplina ry tea msThe second requirement for successful urbandesign is that the work be performed by anintendisciplinary group so thar not only all theissues but all the angles on those issues can beexplored at a professional level.

Today's issues in urban design are far too complexto be understood and addressed by any singleprofession. While sociologists and economisrs mayunderstand each other's products, neither has theskill to perfiorm the other's work. The sensitivemeshing of the intenCisciplinary team is vital, notonly to ensure the quality of its work, but also itscredibility in the community.The dialoguebetween professionals with different backgroundsand areas of expertise can grow tougher,

sophisticated and more meaningful as

recommendations are challenged and hashed outwithin the team. Healthy urban designrecommendations and stronger projects for eachpafticular context spring from such a dialogue.

Th ree : citizen pa rticipationThe key ingredient of urban design is citizenparticipation. In every urban community in thecountry citizens are saying in a variety of ways thatour cities belong to the people who live in them,and are their means of expression. The citizens'movement is no longer the scattered local voice itwas only a few decades ago. Neighborhoodorganizations have a new strength and are beingheard in city halls across the nation.

3 Urban Form and Structure

/_) ,/v'/g-

3 Uftan Form and Structure

The city as art Cities are our most intricate art form, our richestself-expression. Citymaking is the only art inwhich every citizen can take part, and it is also theonly art that never reaches a conclusion.

Night and day we work on our cities, tirelessly, in amyriad ways. We knock things down, build thingsup, change this, change that. We are neversatisfied; we never stop. Every day people are

challenged by the city; challenged by what to keep

and what to conserve, identifuing new needs,

trying to remedy obsolescence, worrying aboutcompetition and investment, scheming anddrawing, negotiating and making commitments.

Not everything involves architects and planners:indeed, when you really get down to it, very littledoes. Countless agendas are going on all the time.Some are in the public interest, some not; manyare in conflict with one another. In a way it's as

if-in each living city-we have generatedsomething with an independent life of its own; aself-destroying and self-renewing organism. li7ithevery demolition the city suffers a partial death.With every new construction it enjoys apartial rebirth.

Some changes are big - a leap in interest rates, a

new highway, a national strike, the relocation of amajor industry or a new tall office tower reflectingsummer sky and scudding clouds in its glass. Th.ymake the front page of the local newspaper andthe six o'clock news on television. Other changesare quite small, like scraping and painting aclapboard house or restoring a front porch. Things

like this go almost unnoticed except by yourneighbors on the block, and in the context of thecity they are hardly perceptible.

Urban Form and Structure

28 But everything adds up, big parts and little parts ofthe whole. A11 are increments of the quality, thecharacter and the heritage of the city we live: inthe place where we work and have our families andnetworks of friends, where we shop and go toconcerts or football games, the place where we

mold our public and private ambitions.

With all this going on, it's a wonder cities have

any form at all. Of course on a scale of one to ten;some do and some don t. Yet this process ofperpetual restless modification has been the way

cities the world over and in every culture have

grown and changed for centuries. Even basic urbanforms which seem at first to be unexceptional andmundane may be found on better acquaintance tohave evolved their own distinct personality andflavor, their own ambience, texture and even smell.Indeed, we are attracted to old cities because toour contemporary eyes they have accreted

treasured layers of heritage. They touch deep

chords in us. In our modem world, in which we are

assailed by the speed of change and by uncertaintyand cheapness, cities with tradition reassure us

with their vocabularies of continuity and theanonymous enrichment of generations.

!7e might say, with Edmund Bacon, that the cityprecisely reflects its society; a pitiless mirror. Andbecause in a way we are each responsible for thisurban mirroq our city tells us about ourselvestruthfully, without a blush. It tells about the thingswe value most and the things we hardly value atall. In the places where we take our visitors, it tellsabout our pride and culture. Yet in gutters andalleyways it is mischievously eloquent about ourstandards of housekeeping. In our tree-shadedresidential neighborhoods it tells about thelifestyles of the affluent beyond the well-mownlawn; but in treeless slums, draped with wires likecobwebs from drunken utility poles, it doesn'tmince matters about our disregard of the poorand derelict.

Oddly enough our urban mirror is also unblinkingabout our relationship to nature. Although ourcities are manmade environments, they exist innatural settings. Urban form tells us unequivocallyhow we have shaped our urban lives in response tocontour, wind and sun, to mountain and desert,and to the presence of rivers.

30 Determinants ofurban form

Every art has an implicit structure. The structure

of American cities is very strong and distinctlydifferent from cities evolved by other cultures.

Because we look at them with contemporary

American eyes, we can leam a lot from the towns

of other nations and epochs. At no time in thehistory of mankind as so much information been

available to us. If we can't fly to Europe on a

Concorde or take a Boeing to the Far East,

television will bring far-off places inpulsing color into our living rooms and bedrooms.

Intemationalism perrneates our lives. Modem

science and technology are intemationallanguages which transcend the cultures and

boundaries we inherit. They are relentless

opponents of localism. Automobiles, refrigerators

and a zillion other consumer products are not onlymuch the same in every country but are assembled

from components manufactured in factories

hundreds and sometimes thousands of miles apart.

But cities are different. They are notinterchangeable. Th.y do not so easily succumb tointemationalism. Urban form, that mirror ofsociety, can't be exported across culturalboundaries. \7e can leam neat and even magical

things from the architectural styles of faraway

towns, but they are mostly cosmetics. The urban

forms we admire in other cultures are not ours; and

the reverse is true too. However much we may love

the winCing streets or arcaded public squares, thehistories, the laws, and the craftsmanship and thematerials that produced Italian hill towns orSaharan walled cities - these are not our

elements. Th.y are the products of cultures and

contexts profoundly different from those that gave

birth to American cities.

Grids Flying across the United States from coast to coastone looks down on deserts, mountains and plains,and on rivers meandering like silver snakes across

the land below; and one is awed by the power andvariety of the nature that upheaved those gauntsnow-peaked ranges, parched those orange deserts,

and silted the vast flat prairie lands.

At the same time it is over the rich agriculturalplains of the Midwest, stretching in everydirection as far as the eye can see until theydisappear in pale horizon mists, that you are aware,

not only of nature's power, but of man'sdimensions. The land is divided by grids as exact

as graph paper. And the grids extend for hundredsof miles, from Gxas to lllinois, and from theAlleghenies to the Rockies, representing thewillful imposition of man's geometry human order,across nature. Hundreds of miles of equivalence:north, south, east and west.

And the overallgeometry subdivides into smallerorders within it. From your aircraft window youcan pick out farm buildings too, neat clusters ofsmall white cubes at the interstices of the grids.

Each cluster is equidistantly spaced from the next,a concentration of geometric objects in geometricspace, a white farmhouse, two or three whitebams, and a grain tower, built around a

square farmyanC.

#.^Yths

I'i. l-ll ,l

l,l--l[*-1 -'---tllir i

-----{

And there are cities as well as farms. From the air

you can see how the agricultural geometry

becomes a geometry of city blocks, and how cityblocks are subdivided to become building lots,

decreasing in scale and increasing in density and

complexity the closer one gets to the city center.

These cities did not originate organically and grow

slowly over time as European cities did. Like theagricultural grids they lie within, they originatedin the Land Ordinance of the ContinentalCongress of 1785. Orthogonal geometries were

applied by surveyors to the raw open continent,generally in squares of one mile by one mile, as a

prelude to grants to big land companies which intum auctioned off quadrants to pioneer farmers orto urban speculators.

Looking down from the comfort of today's airlinerit is perhaps hard to visualize how vast and

intractable that continent below must have

seemed to eighteenth century explorers andtraders, as they inched and hewed their way across

the uncharted virgin plains and over mountainranges under the endless sky. Yet once the land was

mapped, huge territories, even if they were totallyunknown, were suddenly measurable andcomprehensible. The cartesian geometries, in aword, provided under the sky an address, a

destination, a precision of place and human scale.

In the history of human settlement nothing quiteparallels what happened in the United States inthe nineteenth century. Literally thousands offarms and hundreds of new towns and cities were

laid out in a few decades.

The grids of American cities are often condemnedfor being boring. Some are and some aren't: it'sdangerous to generalize. In any case, urban grids

exist and we are well advised to leam and

appreciate their rationale. The grid, rural and

urban, was a perfect tool for nineteenth centurysettlement and speculation. No other geometry

was so easy to lay out, subdivide, describe in deeds,

and sell on the auction block.

Just like the rural grids which continue straight onregardless of whatever rivers or lakes might happen

to lie in their path, urban grids became meshes

thrown across every kind of topography, from theflat land of the plains to the extreme topography ofthe mountains. One would be hard pressed to callSan Francisco boring. That city's grid runs up and

around the hills, and plunges to the waterfront.

Laid over the contours the grid is a mesh ofhorizontal terraces and uphill-downhill avenues.

Of course, not every city has such a romanticsetting. But North America is a continent with anextraordinary array of physical conditions andclimates. The reason for the urban grid, as we have

said, was land speculation, not citybuilding orurban felicity; urban blocks were laid out on maps

with a rectangular geometry of streets so theycould be sold. But under the geometry of the gridis always a geology shaped by movements in theearth' 's crust and weathered by nature's ceaseless

energy, the silting of prehistoric lakes, the scouringof granite and limestone of milennia of winds andwater, the parching of thin soil by relentlesssummer suns, the eroding and cutting of rains andrivers. Orthogonal projections and maps are notthe same thing as being on the ground.Innumerable cities have topographies which warpbut do not break the grid, and gain intense localcharacter from the interplay. Some cities are

bisected by rivers with parkland along their banks,

and the grid leaps across on bridges and continueson the other side. Other grid cities nestle in thebowls of mountain valleys, so that every avenue is

a vista of mountains framed by buildings. Othersrun their grids to the waterfronts of river, lake orocean so that a map of the city looks like a sheet

of graph paper that has been tom along its edge.

And in many cities, the salient grid triangulates toaccept the diagonal of a railroad, a canal or aboulevard, and then varies within each

triangulation the size of street or block.

The character ofGrid Cities

34 Pattern books: a basis for our citiesBecause towns and cities grew so quickly in thenineteenth century block after block was built,not by individuals, but by developer-contractorswho acquired sequences of lots within the grid andthen sold them to individual buyers with standardbuildings on them.

Pattem books for these house-builders, carefullydimensioned to fit standard subdivisions withintypical grids, were published and were in populardemand. The pattem books offered basic plans,

sections and details. These were then modified by

builders, from city to city and region to region, inresponse to market, climate and prevalence ofmaterials. [n some cities, brick predominates. Inothers, timber frame and clapboard.In others, stone.

The most popular books were nationalpublications. They were sold across the country orcould be ordered by mail. Even Sears sold them. Soin city after city you can trace the same basic

pattems, the same basic residential orcommercial boxes.

Yet if you think this leads to sameness, you are

wrong. In equally popular demand were altemativeadd-on items which each individual builder orhouse-buyer could choose out of manufacturers' ormillwork catalogues - bry windows, porches,brackets, dormers, decorat ive I intels, fanl ights,pilasters, friezes, stained glass, and so on. Thesemodular items enabled each buyer to express hisindividuality and his contrast from his neighbor.The result is that blocks and subdivisions whichappear to be equivalent on city maps evolved in

reality into sequences of almost unlimitedvariations. And so throughout the city each block,while based on an underlying geometric unity,became an eloquent "body language" of individualownerships.

The block as the key Despite its origin as land speculation, the grid wassocial unit quickly perceived as an articulation of democratic

ideals, American style. The equivalence of thegrids, expanding across the continent in alldirections for thousands of square miles, came torepresent to immigrants and homesteaders anequivalence of opportunity and propertyownership in country and city.

Urban grids, seldom geometrically the same as

rural grids, were nevertheless set up to fit into ruralquadrants. From the air, the geometry ofrectangular city blocks breaks into the lots ofindividual ownerships-the "grain" of cities as thelate Kevin Irynch referred to them. And thegeometry of rural grids also breaks into rectangularstrips of ploughed land with crops or meadow, orcurvilinear stripes within the rectangular grid.From the city, main urban avenues continue outinto the landscape to become the roads of the ruralgrids. Thus between city and country a sense ofholistic order was set up, a sense of continuity fromcity to country and to city again across the land, inwhich every front door is hnked to every orherfront door within a simple andequivalent system.

Perhaps nowhere is the basic democratic theory ofthe grid city reflected more eloquently than in ourolder residential neighborhoods. In a typicalneighborhood houses line the street on each sidewith porches or steps where families sit in thesummer time. Behind the house there is a backporch and a back yard. The back yard is thefamily's private space and is often fenced in. [nfront there are a porch, steps, a small front lawn,the sidewalk and the street. Unlike the back yards,

front spaces are seldom fenced in. The street itselfis a block long, with a cross-street at each endgiving geographic definition.

36 Th re s ho ld s a n d P ro g ressionsThere is a clear progression in the American cityfrom an ultimate privacy in the individual's house,

the bathroom or the bedroom, to the ultimatepublic space, the city's courthouse square; and the

sequence is a series of clearly articulated

thresholds each with its own architecturalvocabulary. In the house there is a back stair and a

front stair. The back stair leads to a kitchen or

family room that opens to the back porch and

back yard, the private zone. The front stair, incontrast, comes down to areas progressively more

public; a living room and hall; a front door and

porch; front steps and a lawn. These in tum lead

you to a sidewalk and a block-long street with cars

parked on each side, separated by a row ofstreet

trees which not only offer summer shade but also

demarcate the pedestrian zone from the traffic

zone. Now you are in your car, and from theneighborhood street you tum onto the cross-street

that leads you in tum to an avenue into the heartof the city.

Each of these threshold situations has its own

social as well as personal vocabulary. The street is a

summer living room under the sky, unified by frontlawns and shade trees and lined with porches, each

of which is a variant on a standard vocabulary ofcatalogue elements - column, rail, balustrade,

spindle, bracket and so forth.

Porches: boundaries between the privateand public domainsMany of the older porches are stylized anddecorative. Carpenter gothic frerwork in theNorth and frilly cast iron in the South, cast

shadows as though sunlight is filtered through theleaves of a tree. Balustrates, like the fretwork, are

"see through-'elements: a "boundary" between thepublic space of the street and the private space ofthe porch and the house. Many families will put allsorts of extm touches on their porches, too.Structural wood details or omament may be

painted in distinctive colors. Striped canvas

awnings edged with scallops or tassles, andhanging baskets of fems and begonias, will giveextra shade and act as a filter for evening breeze

and the voices and traffic sounds of the street.Evergreen shrubs, like rhododendrons or azaleas,planted along the base of the porch will add anextra screen of waist-high privacy, as well as a

springtime festival of blossoms of every hue-red,yellow, peach and mauve-to greet the firstsummer sunshine and bees of May.

The porches thus become the inteilace betweenthe family and the block, a body-language ofindividual ownership, and yet a language too ofbelonging to the whole. The public zone withinthe house is often a stage set of catalogue parts too.The front stair is omate, at least up to the firstlanding, with omamented newells, spindles andhandrail, and the landing itself is lit by anintricate stained glass window, while the floor ofthe hall will be gracefully inlaid with geometricpattems in polished hardwoods. And this space intum becomes the interface between the public andthe family.

38 Within this order the block thus becomes the key

social unit of the American city, and the blocklong neighborhood street with its unity and

diversity of residential expression is its basic urban

space. Children play in the street under thewatchful eyes of parents. Families sit out on theirporches on summer evenings, exchanging gossip

from porch to porch, and talking with passersby onthe sidewalk. Everyone knows everyone else.

On another level the grid is the physical

infrastructure of urban democracy. From house to

city to nation is an ascending series of scales. Inthe vast size of the continent the grid provides a

precision of place under the sun, a vectored

address where you will find an individual's self-

expression within a geometrically articulatedurban, regional and national holism. Similarlywithin the city there is an ascending micro'series

of scales: house to street; street to block; block to

the neighborhood shopping street and tochurches, schools and parks; andcommunity to city.

The right of individuals to own property withinthe urban grid, and the direct relationship ofbuilding to street, and street to city, has political as

well as social and physical significance in the basic

structure of American urban form. From theearliest decades of urban settlement in New

England a tradition of town meetings has existed

at which all citizens have an equal right to raise

and discuss issues in the public interest. Thegeometric grids of the hundreds of subsequent

nineteenth century towns and cities all across

America came to represent this sense of explicitequivalence of social worth and opportunity, and

the interrelationship of all citizens with each other

and with the functions and processes

of the city.

In most grid cities there is as clear a physical

language of the democracy of law and govemment

as there is a clear physical language of the

neighborhood street as a basic social unit.

The grid doesn't change when it comes to the

courthouse or to city hall. An urban block,somewhere in the center of the city where it oftencan be reached by everyone, is simply devoted to

this function. In other situations, the location of

Urban Structure:The Languageof Democracy

the civic block is geometrically precise within thegrid. Within the block the courthouse is frontal tothe street just as all the other buildings in the cityare, and has a bi-axial plan that relates its intemalgeometries to the city grid. In front of it there may

be a public square- which is not the had-surfacedsquare of European cities, but small park laid outwith axial and diagonal pathways between lawns

and trees. Above the confluence of axialgeometries rises a dome. lndeed in many cities thecourthouse dome is more prominent than cityhall, articulating the prominence of law overpolitics within the holism of the grid and society.

One essence of democracy is that it permits theopen exchange of ideas and concems, and is

prepared to debate them. Another is that it is

accountable. The language of the grid articulatesthe relationship of every citizen to law andgovemment as an equal and non-hierarchicalsystem. Simply stated, every citizen is entitled tobe heard and to get answers.

The human body as metaphorOne might say that American democracy is a

network of dichotomies.

The theory of grids is a network of geometricalequivalences across the land. Yet on the ground,

articulated by hills and rivers and the self-

expression of countless millions of human actions,

cities evolve into places with individuality and a

sense of local belonging. The sense of belonging is

all the more interesting when we take into accountthe fact that at no time in history have people

been more transient. \UTithout doubt the impact ofmodem communications which through

-)a"I5

't€.e'A[\

40 information networks, films and news bulletinsmake us all world citizens contributes to theconfidence with which we uproot ourselves.

Statistics tell us that American families move onan average ofonce every four and a halfyears. Yet

in spite of the unparalleled complexity of themodem American city, we are able to plug

ourselves with equal confidence into the localculture, politics and sense of place of any city we

migrate to. Theoretically the political system and

urban infrastructure are ready to receive us. In a

sense, our own body is its metaphor.

L.ocated at the upper end of our spine, on theperiscope of our neck, is a mind, a consciousness,

which looks out across time and space, across localand intemational history and across cultures, arts,

and politics. At the other end of our skeleton are

our feet-anchored into a particular time andplace. Indeed, perceiving each city as having a

character and an evolving culture, and perceivingall citizens as transients - for even if they belongto that increasingly rare species of Americanwhich lives out its life in only one city, or rarer stillin only one community or neighborhood, life itselfis transient and the life of the city goes on - we

can see that our American pattem is that ofplugging in. We plug our minds and aspirations

into an on-going and evolving local city-cultureand we relate the range of our minds to thespecific space-time location of our feet. r07e make

our dialogue with our local city and its culture by

involving the personal resource of who and whateach of us is.

Plugging into neighborhood and cityDemocracy is thus essentially a framework forplugging in physically, culturally, sociallyand politically.

But when democracies break down, when thechannels of communication are clogged or are

deliberately blocked, when the individual voicefails to be heard and when public actions are nolonger openly accountable - that is

when revolt occurs.

By restoring openness to the local democraticprocess, the social upheavals of the 60's and 70'shave begun to inject new life into the inheritedstructure of urban democracy, particularly at thelocal level.

The revival of our sense of localism in the latterquarter of the 20th century is thus accompaniedby a new commitment to process, a commitmentto the development of the democratic procedures

which enable citizens to be directly involved inthe design of urban policies, and in the decision-making that affects the qualiry of their lives and oftheir local communities.

The changes that affect cities most deeply are

generally not physical at all - at least not to beginwith. As we have said, the main impetus for thebasic intrastructure of American cities was theland Ordinance of the Continental Congress of1785. Infrastructures are generally slow to change.

Yet at play on this basic form today are

innumerable more transient factors such as the rise

and fall of interest rates, the election of a newpresident and national administration, changes in

federal funding programs, an escalation in the costof fossil fuels - factors which powerfully controlthe course and quality of urban life at the localIevel through their impact on local economics,priorities, and what can and cannot be achievedthrough development.

These are national forces. Also at play are powerfulforces that originate at local levels or are intenselyfelt there. In the 1980's the industrial cities of thenortheast and upper midwest have been deeplyaffected, for example, by the decline of domesticsteelmaking in the face of cheaper foreign imports.The local economy of milltowns and steel

communities in the Pittsburgh area, Cleveland,Chicago and Gary have been disastrouslyundermined. In some cities there have beenstrikes, revolts, and violence. Of all the upheavals

Civil rights: a turningpoint for modernAmerican cities

42 of recent years, the civil rights movement of the50's and 60's had perhaps the deepest and mostcreative impact in recent history - the effects ofwhich are still being felt today in virtually every

aspect of urban life.

In 1967 the nation was staggered by riots and

unrest in cities from coast to coast. As with an

earthquake or a volcanic eruption, the danger

signals had been in evidence for a decade before.

Supreme court decisions to integrate schools; theheroic and bitter confrontation of James Metedithwith the University of Mississippi when hisenrollment as a student was barred on the basis ofcolor; the quiet heroism of Rosa Parks when she

refused to stand in the crowded section at the back

of an Alabama bus while seats in the front section,

traditionally occupied by whites, were vacant; theviolence against black churches and schoolchildren by the Ku Klux Klan-incidents likethese signalled local revolts which suddenly flaredinto an anger of national proportion, culminatingin the civil rights march on Washington and theassassination ofKing in 1968.

Clearly national programs were not enough. It was

the intricate machinery of local democracy thatneeded to be made open and responsive once

again to the issues and concems of citizens. Thecrux of the challenge was to transform brutal andviolent reaction - the riots and the arson - intounderstanding, and into processes through whichnew and positive initiatives could be found.

The sixties: a new focus on localismCreative contributions to a growing nationaldebate were made by planners, architects,sociologists and historians whose focus was notnational, but local. Jane Jacobs' DeathandLife ofGreat Ame'ican Cities, with its concem for theneighborhood street, struck a timely chord. UrbanAmerica, Inc., was established, and it publishedCities magazine. New urban design sections were

structured into the federal Department of Housingand Urban Development. The American Instituteof Architects established the non-profit UrbanDesign and Development Corporation. Newly-elected mayor John Lindsey formed the Councilon Urban Design in New York; and he establishedthe offices of Mid-town Planning and DowntownDevelopment and staffed them with talentedyoung architects and planners. A nationwideCommunity Design Center movement sprang up

in urban neighborhoods across the countrymanned by volunteer architects, teachers andstudents. And the R/UDAT progmm came intobeing, sending interdisciplinary professional teams

to cities requesting help.

But none of this would have been effective if otheraspects of change were not occurringsimultaneously. The civil rights movement gave

impetus to other liberations, the womeris

movement for equal rights, the rights of religious

freedom, and sexual freedom, peace movements

and protests by students - all of which are revoltswhose basis lies, not in changing our deniocraticinstitutions, but in simply making them work.

"Sunshine" legislation, which now requires

meetings of public bodies to be opened to citizenattendance, has provided avenues of informationon all issues, large and small. The Bicentennial in1976 made urban Americans conscious of theinherited quality of cities, neighborhoods andbuildings in a way that was new and relevant. For

the first time cities became objects of pride. Urbandesign, in the new atmosphere of openess, became

a means of negotiating environmental issues as

citizens, local govemment and the privatesector-working together-moved complexprojects forward in an atmoshere of debateand concensus.

Urban design has slowly evolved into the powerful

instrument that it is today. By permitting everyone

to participate in the design process, from theearliest stage of defining goals and priorities, tothe final stages of design and securing financialcommitments to proceed into implementation,urban design procedures have become essential

vehicles for achieving policies and projects in aclimate of democratic responsibility and accord.

4 Urban Design in Practice

46 Civic design versuspeople design

4 Urban design in practice

Urban design, like any other art, is a means ofexpression. But unlike painting, sculpture, music

or poetry which originate as individual self-

expressions, urban design is a public and

collaborative expression. Many people participate

in urban design, interrelating individual actions

into networks of impact, in space and over time.As the art which deals with the form and quality

of environments in cities, urban design ultimatelyinvolves everyone.

Architects and urban designers do not make cities.

People do. Of course there are examples of urban

design in cities in the United States and abroad

where formal public squares, grand boulevards, tallfountains and monumental sculptures have been

created with little input from the citizens. Butthere are many more examples in which the

opposite has happened: neighborhood parks,

squares, markets, shopping streets, tavems and

cafe's, and all sorts of other places such as special

street comers which have somehow evolved and

become special after years of use and modification,modeled and remodeled by anonymousgenerations of tree planters, sign painters, lawnmakers, gardeners, bollarders, pavers, and, ofcourse, by you and me who use them.

fuople places versus non-people placesThe odd thing is that these less formal places are

where citizens usually feel most comfortable. Suchplaces speak their language, the body language oftheir city. This is where secretaries and executivescome to brown-bag ar lunchtime, to ta[k, listen tojazz, feed the pigeons, buy fruits and vegetables orhot dogs and chestnuts from pushcart vendors,enjoy a book, lie in the summer sun, skate in thewinter, or just sit on a park bench andwatch each other.

Urban Design in Practice

And if we look around these successful public

places, we will notice that the buildingsthemselves seem to respond. Nearby shop windows

tend to have lively displays; upper windowsills

sprout flowerboxes; someone puts out a flag or two.

Often citizens will work hard to rnodify a formalspace-such as a civic plaza with its cold materials

and hard geometry-into a similar informality; a

group of musicians may appear, and people will sit

on hard steps or low walls to listen. As \U.H.

White has pointed out in his wonderful book, Tlre

Socral Life of Small Urban Spaces, formal spaces are

never very successful as "people places" - that is

to say, warrn and human, and free from petty crime

- until that sort of thing happens.

l!\/ \

lnvolving peopleUntil the late 1950s and early '60s most architectsand urban designers regarded themselves as

interventionists in the daily processes of the city,inserting buildings or civic spaces without any real

understanding of the interests of the citizens. Butthe urban unrest that erupted in the '60s showedjust how wide of the mark architects, along withthe majority of our society, often were. An extremeand widely publicized example of this was thePruitt-lgoe Housing Project in St. Louis, an inner

city public housing project which wonintemational acclaim and awards for its design,but was totally rejected by the citizens andultimately had to be tom down.

If the architects for Pruitt-lgoe had involved thepeople in the formative stages of the project, therecan be little doubt that the design would have

been different. Had they done so, the designers

would have heard about the social culture of theslum streets that had to be demolished to make

way for their new buildings; they would have heard

about the fears and hopes of parents for theirgrowing children. They would have heard aboutsegregation; and about being still locked intopoverty in spite of the replacement housing beingnew and sanitary. They would have heard thatpublic housing creates segregation within families,because when a young person succeeds and rises

above the housing authority's income limits, he orshe can no longer live in the community. Theywould have heard that only renters can live in theproject, and therefore nobody can own a home orbuild up any equity in the community he lives in.Th.y would have heard about intergenerationalrelationships, about crime and insecurity, about

the size and activities of public open spaces, about

neighborliness, identity and pride. And if they had

heard all of these things, and permitted theirdesign to evolve from these contexts rather thanfrom the intellectual and a priori eclecticisms ofthe modem movement in architecture, Pruitt-lgoemay well have been different and been

standing today.

Perhaps we should apologize for mentioningPruitt-lgoe, a project everyone knows so well. \J(/e

only bring it up again because it is an example ofwhat happens when there is no interactionbetween the users of our buildings and architects

in private practice. There are hundreds of otherprojects like it. They exist in every city. Thebiggest difference between the early 1960s and theearly 1980s is that some architects and urban

designers are leaming to listen.

Because of pent,up bittemess and frustration, and

the backdrop of inner city violence of those early

years, the architect's awakening began with a

baptism of fire. No one really knew how toorganize a public process in which citizens were

encouraged to make inputs, to be heard and make

decisions in an orderly manner. There were nomodels of previous processes to look at, no body ofexperience. But over the past 20 years a

considerable body of experience has developed.

Public process inpilvate practice

The earliest examples of architects in privatepractice involving citizens directly in the designpublic of buildings and environments occurred inthe sixties, parallel with the earliest R/UDAG. Atfirst there was no connection between them, otherthan the climate of the times.

!7hen James Bell of Rapid City, South Dakota,made his historic visit to the headquarters of theAIA in Washington in 1967, his request for helpon behalf of his city was not tied to a nationalconsciousness of change. He merety acknowledgedthat the difficult local issues facing his town calledfor expert counsel: and that was all.

A similar focus on local issues lay behind theearliest examples of public participation in theprivate practice of architecture. In many ways the

stage had been set for a number of years before

1967. The nation's schools, particularly innorthem cities, were a veritable cauldron in thesixties. It was here more than in any other pubticarena that the battle over segregation was waged

most fiercely and, ironically, most eloquently.Parents saw education as the key to their childrensfutures. Black parents from socially deprived orsegregated backgrounds looked to integratedschool systems as thresholds to opportunities fortheir children to leam professional skills and entermiddle class career streams - opportunities whichtheir own generation never had. White parentspredicted that integrated schools would lead to thelowering of educational standards, and wouldexpose children from middle class families todrugs, crime and the role models drawnurban slums.

Schools: an early vehicle for focusing onbroader urbanissuesThere is no doubt that this debate over the futureof public education gave a powerful impetus to theflight of young families to the suburbs. And "whiteflight" as it was called in tum impacted the drivefor integration, since it left the inner cityneighborhoods more intensely segregated thanever before. Ironically the Supreme Court, byruling that segregation violates the Constitutionand that public schools must be integrated, madematters worse. And civil rights activists, white as

well as black, saw the schools issue as a vehicle forexposing a number of parallel issues to publicscrutiny issues such as prejudice in employmentpractices, health care and housing.

Fortunately in the midst of the clamor there wereenough parents and educators in many cities andschool districts who were simply dedicated tomaking integrated public education work for theirchildren. They quickly discovered that childrenprovided a good excuse for adults from differentbackgrounds to work together openly on commonproblems. Children dont naturally recognize racialor social barriers. And the more involved in theseissues the adults became, the more they began towork together in an organized way to discusscommon goals and achieve meaningful change,and these processes became early participatorydesign models. [ndeed, years later, many architectsin private practice actually leamed to start withchildren, not simply in projects involving schools

and education, but even in complex urban designcontexts such as downtown redesign; and then towiden the circle outwards, first to parents, then tocitizens generally, and then to city govemment,business, institutions and the rest.

52 The first schools tobe redesigned on

open public processwere built

at the time of thefirst R/UDAT in

Rapid Citv

It will of course never be known what formearly participatory design models would have

taken without the civil rights disturbances of thelate 1960's. The fact remains that the civil rightsmovement brought many severe urban issues to ahead, and in doing so it injected a new and urgentvitality into local democracy - and thus intoparticipatory design processes.

An early example of what can happen was the

design of an elementary school, beginning in1967 , in Pontiac, Michigan, on the heels of theDetroit riots. Like Detroit and other cities,Pontiac experienced deep civil unrest too. Thecity was in a state of confrontation on racial lines;

blacks wanted to secede from the public school

system and set up their own schools, staffed by

black teachers; and, the children were caught inthe middle.

The architects for the new school, David Lewis

and Raymond Gindroz of Urban DesignAssociates, asked the Mayor and the President ofthe Board of Education to hold open meetings at

which citizens could discuss - not the school

directly - but what kind of city and urban society

they would like their children to grow up into, as

the context for a discussion of the school. In theprocess of doing this, major issues were identified,and it was within the context of these issues thatthe capital program for public education was

introduced and debated.

The results were astonishing. Through the focus

on education, parents began to discuss with cityofficals and the business community the shape oftommorrow's society and new opportunities, notonly for young people, but for all of Pontiac'scitizens. The media (radio, television, and thepress) played an important part as these agendas

began to unfold. The little elementary schoolbecame a local cause celebre, a vehicle for arrivingat a totally new concept, something far bigger andmore adventurous, a wholly unforseen andunforseeable program that grew out of theopen process.

Instead of integration, the people began talkingabout pluralism, about American societycomposed of citizens from many origins and manycultural backgrounds. The Human Resources

Center, as they called it, would be much morethan a school. [f there was to be education forchildren, there could be education for adults too.And education was seen to relate to jobs, health,and the arts. The school's recreation componentbecame a community recreation center. Adulteducation workshops, and branches of twouniversities and a community college, wereincorporated. An auditorium became acommunity theater. School kitchens wereexpanded to provide meals-on wheels for elderly. Acommunity health component was added. Anethnic museum was introduced, composed ofartifacts loaned or donated by the citizens to

honor their own backgrounds. A food co-op, withan ethnic foods focus, was organized andincorporated. And as more and more peoplebecame involved, the basic education componentalso grew. What began as an elementary schoolbecame four "schools", providing education for1800 children. A pedestrian streer, linking theresidental neighborhoods to the east to the citycenter, was designed to pass through the complexso that the building would be perceived as a

"shopping street;'with all the facilities which thecommunity had proudly planned opening off it.

Pontiac is an example of what can happen when,like R/UDAG, architects in the private sector joinwith city officials and citizens to open up to thepublic those design issues that deeply affecttheir lives.

Urban Design in Practice

Vttto-, L Drrey

;IHffiMg

Parallel with Pontiac the education parkexperiment at Orange, N.J., culminated in aremarkable middle school designed and built inthe neighboring community of East Orange in theearly and mid-70s. The architects under theleadership of Jules Gregory opened a studio in avacant storefront on Main Street. The EastOrange School Design Center - as the storebecame known - started life with a publiccelebration. The streer was closed to traffic, thehigh school band played marching music, theMayor cut the ribbon, and the storefront studiobegan its work.

Day and evening passersby were encouraged todrop in to chat and comment on progress.

Community planning and design meetings were

held in the store. School students made models ofthe design and the neighborhood. They also made

drawings of what they thought the school shouldbe, and these in tum encouraged adults to givetheir ideas. A site for the school had to be foundin a dense residential area of the city. But in spiteof the need for the school, no one wanted to have

a repetition of the large-scale relocations andbulldozing of the urban renewal days. \7hat couldbe done?

Private practicearchitects open astore-front studio

SC[-,ooL is aPl,qeE Lor tt)ERYoNc h auelohrcq

56 The citizen's solution was as astonishing as it was

innovative. An existing neighborhood park wouldbe sacrificed to become the site for the newbuilding on the understanding that a public openspace and park could be placed on the roof of thestructure, to be reached by ramps which were

extensions of the street system of theneighborhood. Designed as a succession ofenclosed spaces and open courts, the buildingitself is accessible from every direction. The finalbuilding is exuberant and non-hierarchical, withprograms for people of all ages.

thi{:rt

!n".Q,r

-..*,its'r ,r,r* 'liffiA similar storefront studio was opened byIndianapolis architect, Evans'Woollen, when hewas asked to undertake the redesign of the FinlayMarket area in Cincinnati. The result of thatprocess was a refurbished historic markethouse anda new community center. The citizens were so

hrppy about the outcome that they staged a grandopening and a street celebration.

58 An Experimental Environment is designedand built with childrenMeanwhile in the political atmosphere of student

disturbances on the university campus, a typicalasphalt school yard in Berkeley, Califomia, was

transformed into a diverse play and leamingenvironment. The yar,J was planned and thenbuilt by parents, children, teachers, universitystudents and neighborhoods in the surrounding

community. Under the design guidance of RobinMoore and the educational guidance of HerbWong, school principal, Project \ilYEY

(Washington Experimental Yard) became a means

for people to explore themselves and theirenvironment. After dumping and molding tons ofsoil, and then building structures for play and

enclosure, the yard became a garden that is

perpetually changed every month and every

season, demonstrating the value of shared lives

and shared leaming.

These projects were among the first in the nationthat were performed by private architecturalpractitioners. The architects involved in them didnot know about each other or about the fledglingR/UDAT program. They were working in isolation,inventing their citizen-participation processes thebest way they could as they went along, as an

answer to the urban situation they foundthemselves in, with its intense political and social

confl icts and pressures.

Shirt sleeve maprs,Tshirt funkers

These early examples of what can happen have

blossomed into a wide variety of architectural andurban design projects of far greater complexity inthe 1970s and '80s. Housing projects, parks, sportsfacilities, and campus plans, markethouses,neighborhoods, waterfronts, city markethouses,and city centers have been opened up to citizeninputs, with rich and unexpected results. Andthese have been paralleled S the growing

recognition and complexiry of R/UDAG.

The media have played an increasingly importantrole in the success and expanding publicunderstanding of urban design as a public process.

In addition to newspaper, radio and televisioncoverage, television has been used successfully for'Uesign-ins". Glevision studios have became

architectural studios, and the public has beensolicited to call in their ideas and comments.Public meetings have been carried live on TV,with hoolcups for the public-at-large to telephonefrom their homes and make statements or askquestions during the plenary sessions

or the workshops.

60 It was as if people were thirsty for the opportunityto participate in shaping and molding the futurecourse of their cities. In some situations in the late

70's and early 80's as many as 500 people wouldcommonly tum up for public meetings, and theywould come, not simply to sit in the audience andlisten, but ready to work, ready to join issue-

oriented workshops and small group discussions,

knowing that their detailed inputs were just as

critical as discussions about the overall scheme ofthings. One of the interesting aspects of these

open processes was that people in official positionssaw without prompting that they had to shed theirtitles if they wanted to participate effectively.Mayors, bankers, librarians, agency representatives,and everyone else in our multi-titled society, hadto be what they really are, simply citizens in ademocratic process in which their particularbackground and skill becomes, not a status,

but a resource.

Extraordinary things began to happen in thesepublic workshops. In one process the mayor of alarge city came to the workshops in shirt sleeves,

ready to get on with it. In another the bankpresident tumed up in a T:shirt with a humorousmessage stencilled across his chest. Onecommunity celebrated the conclusion of itsprocess by parading its plan through the streets,with fire engines and a high school band all theway to city hall. Another had a gigantic festival inthe courthouse square, with music, dance,

sideshows, conjurors, food, an antique car rally,and a marathon footrace. And another communityclosed the square around its markethouse, and hada feast and public dance.

Why did all this happen?Why did all this happen? There are deep rcasons.

The spirit of the late 1960's and early '?0's was one

of revolt. The civil rights movement was only one

of several liberations producing a mood of popularuprising against the established and remote

decision-making normally controlling our lives.

But at the local level there was a definiteconnection between the eagemess with whichcitizens participated in creating local plans and

implementing them, and the inherited form and

democracy of American grid cities.

The relationship of each family's front door andporch to their neighborhood street, and the streetto the city, as a succession of scales gave everyone a

sense of unspoken and inalienable right to be

heard, and to hear others. People talked inmeetings about national problems, the economy,technological and industrial change, energy anddemography, and about how these large-scale

forces affected their cities and their ownneighborhoods. So they also came to talkeloquently about the qualities of local heritage. Itwas not that they were against modemarchitecture, but they opposed its transferability-the fact that so many modem buildings were thesame in city after city. They wanted to be sure thatwhatever was built physically would parallel whatwas done programmatically, that it would be partof city building, and that in its style and materialsit would be sensitively and precisely local. In otherwords, it had to be in their voice.

To begin with, architects invented their ownprocesses and procedures. They worked for themost part in isolation, responding to the need ofthe times and unaware of what others were doingat the same moment in other places. Lawrence

Halprin for example developed a process in theearly seventies which he called Thke Part,

engaging citizens in environmental planning.Caudill, Rowlett and Scott, a large architecturalfirm in Houston, Texas, developed a program ofarchitectural "squatters", in which architects wouldlive in the community for which they were

developing designs, becoming'titizens"themselves as well as professionals for the entirelife of the project. And participation on a

R/UDAT by one of SOM's partners, John Kriken,led to the creation of an urban design team withinSOM's San Francisco office and another in theirPortland office. And similarly Urban DesignAssociates, the firm that designed the HumanResources Center in Pontiac, has developedparticipatory design procedures similar to the four-day R/UDAf model, but extended to occur in acarefully organized sequence of steps along a time-line of nine months or a year.

But private practice was not always the best way torespond. Sometimes communities-particularlylow-income neighborhoods-have neither themoney nor the intemal organization to go throughthe process of engaging and architectural firm, oreven of getting local govemment to do so on theirbehalf. As a result new groups began springing up

in various cities in response to this need.

New ways oflistening and

responding

62 Community design centersIn Baltimore, Maryland, a small group of architectsand planners got assistance from both theAmerican Institute of Architects and theAmerican Institute of Planners, and formed in1968 a Neighborhood Design Center.

The purpose of the Center was to enable residents

of low-income neighborhoods to participate incomprehensive planning processes aimed towards

improving their environments, including self-helpprojects. The Center provided technical assistance

in evolving comprehensive plans, help innegotiating and evaluating development proposals

in their neighborhoods, and developingaltemative designs for environments, historic orvacant buildings, and vacant lots. It was not longbefore the Center took one more step, and became

a non-profit development corporation which has

to date completed over two hundred

and fifty projects.

Baltimore's Neighborhood Design Center is part ofwhat is now a national network of communitydesign centers. CDC's to quote Paul Sachner inArchitectural Record in June 1983, "are toarchitecture what legal aid is to law, and free

clinics to medicine." According to Sachner thefirst CDC opened in 1963 when several architectsstarted the Architects Renewal Committee inHarlem (ARCH), with aid from the New YorkChapter of the AIA, to fight a proposed freeway inUpper Manhattan.

But CDC's did not really get going until theturbulence of the civil rights and the antiVietnamwar movements in the years between 1968 and1972. There can be no doubt that the network of

CDC's which opened in cities across the nation inthose years were not only a response by architects,urban planners, sociologists, attomeys, politicalscientists and economists bent on solving theproblems of America's urban poor, but were also

part of a new kind of power struggle in Americancities, a struggle on the part of neighborhoods andurban communities to have a greater control overtheir own environmental destinies by entering intothe political decision-making process and, throughnon-profit corporations, by implementing some oftheir own recommendations. Today, fifteen ormore years later, there are some 60 CDC's inoperation across the country.

Some CDC's are formally or loosely related touniversities or other institutions; others are

organizationally independent. They all operate onthe fundamental principle that community groups

know better than anyone else the needs andproblems of their neighborhoods. \il7hether

independent or institutionally related, they gaintheir funding from a variety of sources such as

foundations, govemment agencies, corporations,and fund drives, and through performingcontracts, usually with local or stategovemment agencies.

An example of an organizationally independentCDC is Tioy Professional Assistance (TAP) in NewYork, an offshoot from Rensselaer PolytechnicInstitute. In its early days TAP was an all-volunteercenter operated by a group of students and facultyin a storefront, but today its full-time staff includestwo architects with an annual budget of $100,000,performing contracts for new and renovatedhousing, and providing an architectural clinic forhomeowners, small businesses, groups and othersin low-come neighborhoods. Like TAP several

other CDC's are intensively neighborhoodoriented: e.g., the CDC's in [.os Angeles,Pittsburgh, Atlanta and San Francisco to name a

few. Others are regional in their range. The East

Tennessee CDC offers services to ruralcommunities, and the Comell Region CommunityDesign Assistance program uses students andfaculty as resources in offering services within a

sixty mile radius of Coming. Their work in tumled in 1979 to the formation of The Small JbwnCommunity Design Workshop, and also toanother division, the Preservation PlanningWorkshop, initiating surveys and the architecturalpreservation of historically significant structures inan eleven county constituency. The Denver CDChas, during the past two years, negotiated jointproposals with private firms to do programming,planning and design work for small communities.CDC's continue to be formed. One of the mostrecent, the Columbus Neighborhood DesignAssistance Center in Ohio, was started inOctober t987.

64 Among the great values of CDC's, whether theyare independent centers or related organizationallyto universities, is their impact on students.Through intem programs they offer a professionalthreshold for candidates. As Michael Smith,director of the Denver CDC, says: "we are the folkarchitects of our time." They also offer formal andinformal training programs in architectural andplanning schools. One of the best known is thegraduate program conducted by Henry Sanoff atNorth Carolina State University, in which anumber of new techniques involving urban design"games" and role-modeling have been developedas a means of structuring the definition of issues,

recommendations and strategies. And atMississippi State University a Small Towns

Institute has been formed by James Barker whichoffers the services of students in structuredparticipatory process for sma[[ cities inthe deep south.

Other Kinds of CentersThe R/UDAf model and CDC's have createdprecedents that have inspired universities todevelop centers. These offer architectural andplanning services as studios for students that are

also useful to communities, thus serving the dualpurpose of practical education and the delivery ofserious recommendations. For example , Ball StateUniversity has an Urban Design Center in astoreftont on Main Street in Muncie, Indiana, forongoing studies in the downtourn and surroundingneighborhoods, and the Center also conductssquatter programs in small Indiana towns thatrequest help. Other universities that have

conducted similar programs include Ohio State,

Arizona State, Kansas State and Yale University.

The RiUDAf model has also been used by localAIA chapters to carry out specific design projects.The Keamy Street project in San Francisco andthe North market project in Columbus, Ohio,were performed by respective local chaprers, whileat the state level a K/DAT was organized inKentucky. Other R/UDAT derived forms includethe AIAs Charrette programs put together by IrisMiller for Washington, D.C., and Alexandria,Virginia, and a study of the White River Park inIndianapolis (P/DAI). The latest of these, as we goto press, has occurred through the Rio SaladaChapter of the AIA in Gilbert, Arizona, outsidePhoenix. And recent developments reveal thatlocal govemment is organizing similar models.

ln March 1985 the Denver Planning Office inconjunction with the district council officeinitiated a demonstration project to address

specific neighborhood planning issues in the FivePoints Neighborhood. They adopted and modifiedthe R/UDAI process and built into it a

commitment of follow-up. They assembled aninterdisciplinary ream composed of city officialsfrom various city departments and agencies (2 ofwhich have been represented on previousR/UDATs), local design professionals, bankers anddevelopers. The approach helped the communityand city focus on issues in a short time-frame,become visible and accessible in the intensive3-day on-site design charette, and made a

commitment to implement 40 short.rangerecommendations within 90 days of the meeting.Some actually started the next day. Itdemonstrated to the mayor and the communitythat the city could respond in a meaningfulwayand utilize its resources in this hands-on process.

Conclusion: people made placesThrough these processes, professionals in variousspecialized fields are leaming the benefits ofworking in interdisciplinary reams. As a result ofthe R/UDAf program alone, nearly six hundred ofthe nation's top architects, planners, economists,lawyers, developers, sociologists, geographers,political scientists and engineers have retumed totheir specializations after having an intensivework-experience in teams, and through CDC's andother similar programs the number runs intohundreds more. Similarly ordinary people in bigcity neighborhoods, small towns and rural areas,

and students, have leamed together why thingshappen the way they do. They have leamed aboutthe mechanics of getting things done on both theprivate and the public sector. They have also foundthat, through exploring unanticipated avenues,they can uncover options leading to enrichingachievements far beyond their original goals.

66 Conclusion! people-made places

This was the extraordinary lesson of those earlyexamples of participatory designing in Pontiac andEast Orange, and it has been the lesson ofinnumerable R/UDATs. In the years since then,examples have multiplied of what can be achieved

when citizens get the bit between their teeth and

become creatively involved in public design issues.

All over the country historic areas have been

conserved, valuable buildings have been saved

from the wrecking balls and lovingly restored,

public spaces have been transformed from sterileanonymity to people-places full of life and color.

Cities have become art museums with outdoorsculptures, gardens and waterfalls have been putin, and groves of trees have been planted toprovide summer shade. Street vendors andmusicians have been welcomed, and the city has

put chairs out so that executives, secretaries andshoppers can listen at lunchtime to spontaneous

violinists or accordionists. Tiaditional covered

markets have re-opened, and the center city has

come alive again through being taken over by itscitizens. In summary we have seen how these

things can grow. \7e have seen how design starts

with words, discussion, dialogue, perceptions, andwith base maps, statistics, photographs, andbudgets.'We have seen how very soon diagrams

begin to occur: diagrams of interrelationship, thisconcept interrelated with that, diagrams of place,

of magnitude and of urban dynamics. And once

people see ideas begin to take shape before theireyes, we can feel excitement rise. The pulse begins

to beat a bit faster. Maybe, they say, we are going toachieve something after all.

New goals form, strategies begin to be discussed,

priorities tum into programs, local humanresources are linked to strategies and methods ofimplementation, and new pattems of citizenleadership emerge. Detailed three-dimensionaldesign takes shape, focussing more and more onlocal needs and contexts, until it reaches a pointwhere design and vehicles for implementation are

fused in the minds of every participant. Andsuddenly each participant realizes that for the firsttime every person, whether local citizen, studentor far-off professional, has heard and debated allthe ideas together, and has watched design emerge,

and has understood and enthusiastically agreed tocomplex recommendations as well.

From this understanding grows the most forcefulconsensus, the kind that provides a mayor and hiscouncil with a sense of solid constituency, a

banker with a sense that he is not merely investingin a project but also in community pride, a localneighborhood leader with a sense that hiscommunity really can be effective in tumingthings around, and that all the late nightvolunteer meetings after all have notbeen in vain.

5 Urban Design: A Developing Tradition

4-z'-(

"3,€a"z \. ,/

70 Urban design andthe public interest

5 Urban design: a developing tradition

Ironically, the movement to enfranchise citizens is

still only beginning. Many decisions are made

without the participation of users. In spite ofappearances, our cities are not strangers toplanning. Quite the contrary. Virtually every cityof any size has experienced many proposals, manyplans, involving huge investments inconsultants and countless thousand of hours ofprofessional effort.

But much of this planning comes to naught, eitherbecause of economic or other changes over whichplanners have no control, or more seriouslybecause of community opposition. The waste is

enorrnous. And because we can't agree among

ourselves, our cities suffer.

It is particularly tragic when otherwise well-intentioned and intelligent planning efforts runinto a stone wall of community opposition because

planners have failed to openly enfranchise theinputs and wishes of citizens. In almost every cityover the past two decades projects have been builtthat could have been so much better and richer ifthe inputs of local citizens had been seriously

sought and incorporated, and for every projectthat has been built we have seen a dozen projects

of far-reaching potential benefits to communitieskilled by the opposition of citizens, not because

they basically disagreed or did not want them, butbecause they felt themselves excluded andimposed upon, causing a loss of credibility on allsides that sometimes takes years to overcome.

Yet the other side of the coin is that we have asocial and political framework in our cities inwhich decision-making can and shouldenfranchise citizens. Indeed the same process

which stops projects can also ensure their success

and inject into them richness and pride. By itsvery nature, urban design and architecture areinterventionist. A new building will inevitablyhave an impact on the context in which it is built.Modem architecture has passed through a periodin which innumerable new buildings were insertedinto existing environments with a blindness tophysical contexts, to say nothing of local issues

and values, that seems to us today to beextraordinary and intolerable.By the same token,handled with openness and sensitivity, a newproposal can with a little care and sensitivity, bemade to act as a focus of many public issues, andto relate sensitively to inherited environment,incorporating the aspirations and values of thepeople whose city and traditions symbolize localpride. Thomas Jefferson, the only AmericanPresident who was also an architect, said: "l knowof no safe depository of the ultimate powers ofsociety but the people themselves: and if we thinkthem not enlightened enough to exercise theircontrol with a wholesome discretion, the remedyis not to take it from them, but to informtheir discretion."

Urban design andarchitecture: form

responding toparticipation

Urban design began as an outgrowth of studio

architecture and planning. The first universitycourses in urban design in the United States

began in the Graduate School of Design atHarvard in the mid-1950's under Walter Gropius.[t is perhaps not surprising that he would attemptto apply to U.S. cities the Bauhaus traditionincorporating the applied ideals of European

socialism and the studio-workshop approach toarchitectural design. Yet much as a result of hisintellectual effort, urban design has evolved intothe most crucial vehicle we have for focusinginterdisciplinary talents and intelligence of thehighest order on the contexts of change in thetowns and cities we live in. R/UDATs with theiremphasis in participatory democracy in the spiritof Jefferson's words and their interdisciplinaryfocus on precise local issues have proved to be

laboiatories of participatory urban design inaction. And their influence on public agencies,

private practice and schools of design has

continued to deepen over the years. If our citiesare, indeed, a pitiless mirror of our democraticdecision-making civilization, it seems appropriateto pay some attention to improving ourparticipatory processes beyond the achievements

so far made in urban design. The initiative must

lie in private practice. Here we will examine thetypical elements constituting pafticipatory urbandesign processes as they occur in everyday

practice, rather than in the collapsed time-frameof R/UDAT. The salient ways in whichprivate practitioners can address communityissues are:

Through careful listening. Sometimes it's hard tolisten and many of us have to reeducate ourselves

to do so. After all architects and planners are

trained to project their own values and ideas withtheir earphones tumed off to the citizenry.

By providing a public forum and opportunity forparticipation by involving all sectors of thecommunity. If urban design is to be open anddemocratic in the sense of Jefferson's words, thedesign/decision-making process treats as clienteveryone whose environment is affected. Thevehicle has to be properly organized publicmeetings, open to everyone who has an input tomake in the public interest.

By communicating. A common base ofinformation that will provide the participantswith critical understanding is a prerequisite toopen, intelligent dialogue and discussion. Usefulbase information can in fact be developed by thecitizens themselves in consort withthe professionals.

This aspect of design process is invaluable indeepening public understanding of the range and

impact of the issues, and later it will pay dividendsin the public's grasp of accountability.

72 By seeking citizens as resources. Architects andplanners who have worked openly with citizengroups will confirm that citizens know more about

their own community than outside professionals

do. They have aspirations and perceptions thatcan give unique insights to designers.

Furthermore, a cross-section of citizens usually

includes an energetic mix of creative viewpointsleading to rich and complex forms.

Architects/planners can organize workshops forthese citizens to assist in developing detailedbackground materials, analysis of priorities, andfinancial and social impacts of altemativerecommendations and scenarios.

By redefining the problem in an interdisciplinarycontext.Although it is an outgrowth ofarchitecture, urban design in complex urban

situations relies on bringing several disciplinestogether in teamwork. The give-and.take of these

professionals with citizen groups provides an

extraordinary range and depth of understandingfor everyone.

By using design as a creative tool to explore anddevelop three.dimensional options andalternatives. Design is perhaps the best form ofcommunication in open pafticipatory processes.

When alternatives are discussed and explored indesign, everyone gets involved creatively.Accountability is in both directions, professionals

and citizens. Differences fall away. This is

particularly important in situations in which thecontacts and language of the citizens may be verydifferent from that of the professionals, say in alow-income black neighborhood in a large city, ora white suburban community.We should neverforget that designers typically belong to auniversity-trained elitist subculture that is distinctand different from most of the constituencies theywork for, and that common languages ofunderstanding have to be established.

By establishing the essential connectionsbetween the various elements of the process andparticipants. It is important in open pafticipatoryprocesses that citizens see that linkages absent inthe past, are now established. For example, it is

clearly an indication that the process is takenseriously by local agencies if agency directors arepresent at meetings, and by local govemment ifthe mayor and council members participate.

Similarly, the serious intent of the private sector is

signalled by the presence of a bank president andthe president of a development corporation. Andthe best of all worlds occurs when they take offtheir jackets, roll up their sleeves, and participatein working groups seeking solutions. This is a two-way street. It may be politically advantageous ro amayor and council and financially advantageousto a bank president to know that particularrecommendations are backed by citizen consensus.

By allowing feedback and evaluation of previousdecisions. Feedback is not only important in localpolitics, it has a long history going back to theroots of our democratic traditions. Ideas are re-evaluated every step of the way; accountabilityis built in.

By accountability. Accountability thus goes backto the roots of our democratic traditions. Whencitizens have made the effort to be serious

resources for designers and have come to meetingsto explain their fears and their goals, it isimportant that the results of the design process

should be referred back to them fortheir criticisms.

lt is particularly important for developers toexplain the theory of how their financial deals are

put together, and how altemative financialmodels affect design. Experience has shown thatonce trust is built up, citizens will accept thatdevelopers cannot disclose the details complexand delicate financial negotiations. But thepublic's trust and commitment to projects pays offin the impact that pride has on the approvals

process; project marketing; and on security once

the project is built.

,:i'lti;,-

6 Process, Partnerships and the Public Sector

.VrfrY (fr'PZ

. 7AA4C fft r-tlt

ADERLY llott6tN6

Vffnnymfilf:awpfu?.,

6 Process, partnerships and thepublic process

Puhlic management In many communities where successful

pafticipatory design processes have been carriedout, citizens have become so proud of the results

that they want "a piece of the action". Generallythis takes the form of the management of selected

social programs that have emerged from theprocess. But sometimes, citizens have formed non-profit corporations beforehand, or similarorganizations, specifically to implement andmanage the whole project or parts of it. Managingnon-profit organizations requires technical skill.The right time to prepare citizens for roles of thiskind ideally lies within the planning and designprocess. Tiansferability of these skills is thereforean important component.

Process All urban design pnocesses must have

these features:

oAccountabilityoFlexibility to re-evaluate and deal with changeoCredibility in govemment and the private

investment sector, andoAbility to recognize and respond to the different

agendas and roles of participants

Partnerships":"Ti[;:ri[:::.::1'ffi']:,il[*:";ffi:r'

sense is needed in good urban design processes,

rather than simply a collaboration or a loose ad

hoc association of interests. Partnership implies

: I, JH' *if :'IT,IH:,:: ff i ll1l,1i'ff:gain. A commitment is needed on the part ofevery actor in the partnership to be a full resource

to the effiort. Partnership comes in many different

forms. Some are quantifiable: [and, money, equity.Communities seldom have these, though citieswith foundations or trust funds might make equityavailable. Others are qualitative, but not less

valuable: knowledge of context, elements ofprogram, insight and creativity, consensus andendorsement, energy and sweat equity.

Partnerships between the public and privatesectors, the community and the city, the variouslevels of govemment, between various educationalinstitutions, agencies, organizations anddepartments and the interdisciplinary partnershipsbetween various professional institutions,disciplines and consultants - all are interrelatedto make the process work. These partnershipsresult, not just in contractual agreements betweenpafties, but in commitment to implementparticular projects in the public interest, insuredby the knowledge that the community really wantsand endorses them.

The public sector The public sector consists generally of two basicpublic groups, the govemment sector and thecommunity sector. In the past the two groups

became polarized. [t is not at all uncommon tohear people refer to the govemment sector as

"they". It is their responsibility to maintain ourroads, and to provide good schools. They clear ourgarbage; and they run the government.

What we don't often appreciate is that they are us.

They are citizens too. Officials involved ingovemment from eight to five are members of thecommunity after five, just like us: they own theirhomes, pay taxes, mow their lawns, and belong tocommunity groups just like everyone else.

Furthermore, in a democracy, the reverse is equallytrue. The govemment is us. Legal avenues forhaving our voices heard in policy-making are

open, and our taxes pay for movingpolicy into action.

The development Jb make public/private partnerships in urbanprocess design w1k successfully, government and

community must mutually understand thedevelopment process and how to tnake it operatein the best public interest.

Together, the public sector and the communityshould begin by establishing a wish list of goals.

And then they should develop, through the urbandesign vehicle, realistic priorities, cost benefitanalyses, pro formas indicating levels ofinvestment and risk, management plans, and whothe implementers are anticipated to be. On thebasis of this information, projects forimplementation can be negotiated, some of whichmay be owned and managed by

citizen organizations.

78 Government The govemment sector consists of elected and

appointed decision-making members of thecommunity: the Mayor, Council, PlanningCommissions and Boards, as wefl as the staff andagencies that support them. These groups operate

at different levels of the decision-making process.

Some decide, some advise, and some inform.

Understanding govemment, especially your ownparticular form of local govemment, is critical tosuccessful urban design processes. Govemmentinstitutions on the local, regional, state andfederal levels are often plagued with cumbersome

bureaucracy, favoritism and'bld boy" politics, andare thus at odds with people who want to get

things done. Elected officials are prone to be loyalto special interest groups, while their staff may be

advocacy-oriented and more socially conscious.

Citizens should be aware that, by nature, bothgroups tend to be guided by federal and stateprograms and regulations rather than by local goals

and priorities. Therefore citizens have to maketheir priorities known vigorously.

Conflicting public sector interests are debilitatingto urban design processes. It is certainly a primarychallenge to agency staffs and elected officials tominimize conflicts.

If conflicts among citizen groups or betweencitizens and local govemment are latent,competing private sector development interestscan be counted on to bring them out. Conversely,if the public and private sectors have hiddenagendas, even though they might be in the bestpublic interest, confidence in planning will be

eroded very quickly once citizens smell a specialdeal in the air.

It is therefore impoftant not to buck conflictinginterests or private sector competition but to makethese conflicts part of the design process. It is

salutary to conduct competition in public and toinclude competitors and govemment together inpublic deliberation. In this way competinginterests become a vehicle for negotiation throughdesign that is meaningful and enrichingto all concemed.

Objectives:

oTo minimize conflict of goals,eTo align needs and means,oTo imprcve quality,oTo remove obstacles and misunderstanding,oTo define partnership roles and assess

responsibility, andoTo maximize public good relative toprivate gain.

Other government objectives include:

Establishing an urban design consciousness ingovernment that bridges political divisions, andfocuses on issues affecting physical design and thequality of life within the city.

Establishing an open, accountable, urban designpnocess that can get the citizens and the privateinterest groups involved.

Prcmoting responsibility and leadership in boththe govemment and the community sectors as

guardians of the physical form of the city bycontinually encouraging urban design issues to beraised and developing appropriate policies,frameworks and processes of communication toinsure qualiry urban design, through encouragingopen discussion and developing altemativeproposals if required.

Being an effective agent in guiding the process ofgrowth by incorporating development and urbandesign into standard operational procedures at alllevels of govemment. Needless to say, it subvertsthe capacity of urban designers to act as brokers innegotiating design solutions of maximum benefitto all concemed if urban design is perceived as

something to be done in order to make thesituation look good, like gamishing an overdoneroast with parsley, after all development decisionsare made. To be effective, visual design values mustbe incorporated in the decision process fromstep one.

Employing talented and intendisciplinary groupsof urban designers and professional consultants onthe public payroll, by commission or competition,to undertake any project called for in the capitalbudget, and maintaining a contextual research

component as an integral part of the project.

Coorrdinating those aspects of urban design thathave regional impact among various agencies andlevels of govemment on an interjurisdictionalbasis, and enacting forwad-looking legislation andpolicies to encourage people interjurisdictionallyto engage in urban design activities.

Introducing and encouraging the vehicles forpublic and private partnerships necessary toachieve a more responsive, higher qualityurban design.

Developing meaningful incentives that result inquality development, whether by the public,private, or non-profit sectors, and that achievecommunity goals.

80 The communitysector

Every urban design project has a local diversitythat makes it different, particular. A simple

definition of community is the range of publicinterest in that project.

Each community consists of a variety of actors.

Our society functions to a large degree on the basis

of community and special interest groups. Some ofthese groups are already highly organized, withdefined agendas and objectives, and, like churchgroups, are used to functioning at a decision-

making level.

Others operate on an informal ad hoc basis, beingmotivated by specific issues. Individuals are

generally more concemed about communitydevelopment issues directly affecting their ownlives, and dorlt immediately take positions onlarger-scale or long-term development questions

whose local impact is not apparent, unless they

form or join an organization that is dedicated tothese larget-scale questions.

How a community relates to the decision-makingthat affects the future quality of its local life and

environment is at the root of our democratic way.

Participatory design processes attempt to reinforcedemocracy's underlying themes and make themwork better with richer and more

satisfying products.

l,ooking particularly at the community aspects ofthese processes, we have to recognize that a

concrete and apparently limited project, if it isrelevant and potent, will inevitably becom'e the

focus of broader issues, and the broader issues willin turn attract their appropriatecommunity concem.

The best participatory processes occur whencommunity groups and individuals are self-

organizing, free and inclusive, around the issues.

The worst are when the promoters behind projects,

whether in the private sector, or govemment, orboth, try to exclude citizens from expressing

concem, to say nothing of excluding citizens fromcreative roles, thus polarizing anger and

opposition. Professional organizers can also be theAchilles' heel of participatory processes simplybecause they presuppose a priori goals, agendas

and strategies, instead of allowing them tohappen naturally.

As we have pointed out earlier, it is critical torecognize that participation must be open-ended.Time and again, unexpected and rewarding results

occur. A community group will emerge from theprocess and assume the responsibility ofsponsoring housing. Another will do somethingspectacular and creative for the elderly. Anotherwill inject new life into existing institutions forthe arts, such as a branch theater, anenvironmental arts program for children, or ethniccrafts. G ive-and-take designing, baclaand-forthdialogue, can only happen when everyone works

openly and inclusively on something. And the

best results occur when the opportunity to extend

the project creatively, implement it, andparticipate in its management, is built into thedesign process itself.

Some objectives for the communitysector are:For special interest flroups:

To sponsor interdisciplinary rrsearch, publicforums and workshops on key urban design issues

that are of particular concem to them and topublish and distribute information to allinterested parties.

To orpand the role of individual special interestgroups to research and present in open forums key

urban design issues involving other individualsand special interest groups from the public andprivate sector. This has the effect of defusing

confrontation between groups, spreadingunderstanding of viewpoints different from one's

own, and getting everyone used to the idea

of accountability.

To lobby for urban design issues and qualitydesign through their respective constituency andfriends in the public and private sector.

To be prepared to take on special projects forimplementation, and to accept the challenge ofcontinuing management.

For the media:

To educate and raise the level of understandingand make the general public aware through soundinformation of the basic facts on key urban design

issues. As power-brokers, the media have deep

responsibilities in keeping pafticipatory processes

open and fair to all by responsibility reporting allsides. The way events like public forums or thepublic discussion of altemative designs are

promoted and reported can clearly make or breakthe best run processes.

For individuals:

To speak out and demand that elected officialsand the media be more reponsive to urban designissues that affect the quality of life intheir community.

To become dinectly involved in a meaningful way

in the local and regional urban design discussions

of issues that affect your community.

To be prepared to assume responsibility,particularly in those areas that you recommendfor action.

Encourage educational institutions to ptay a moremeaningful role by providing community service

and offering technical assistance.

To articulate concerns in the broader publicinterest, as well as advocate your own pet urbandesign ideas and values.

To promote the collective confidence andoptimism of the community and encourageparticipation in whatever form it comes.

82 The private sector The private sector includes major business

interests directly affecting an urban design orarchitectural proj ect; i.e., developers, bankers,

board members, and major tenants involved in thedesign process either at the actual decision-makinglevel or as reviewers and critics or as investorsand managers.

Because of the competitive nature of developmentthese risk takers tend to be conservative. Theirprofit-motive orientation is shaped by financialand govemmental forces that are, for the mostpart, beyond their control.

Some developers perceive design or aesthetics as

costly and unnecessary frills. Th"y also see

community involvement and design reviewprocesses as roadblocks to the developmentprocess. Enough examples have accumulated overthe past decade of costly bureaucratic delays, orprojects killed because of community opposition,to convince all but the most obdurate that fargreater benefits accrue when agencies, electedofficials and the public are properly informed andinvolved. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that themore forward looking developers today openlywelcome predictable design reviews or a properlystructured development process involving citizens,when the intent and time considerations are clearat the start.

lndeed, important pioneering inroads are

occurring. Interdisciplinary teams in whichdevelopers are team members, pioneered inR/UDATs, is becoming daily more widely acceptedin private practice. In the last two or three years,

urban design consultants working on urbanrevitalization programs have begun includingdevelopers from the first day of their contracts, so

that developers can actively shape the feasibility ofprojects from their inception, and also canrepresent a continuity from designinto implementation.

Every R/UDAf, and every private practice team is

becoming a casebook for the ne)ft, ademonstration to build on. Akeady, leadership

does not necessarily come from architects.Developers, economists, sociologists, politicalscientists, lawyers are responding to contexts inwhich they are taking the lead. In a recentsituation, leadership of a multidisciplinary teamhas been taken by an environmental sculptor.

Some objectives for the private sector arez

To develop and establish with the public sectoran appropriate framework and limits fordevelopment through accountable urban designreviews and approval processes that allow formaximum community input from the earliestpossible stages and within a known andpredetermined period of time.

To participate in a leadership role in the designprocess as a meaningful paftner with the publicand community sectors.

To view citizens as resources whose creativeinputs can improve the project and whoseconsensus can help it to move forwarrC moreeffectively through its statutory reviews.

To investigate and develop new, innovative, andcneative approaches that can be utilized inestablishing partnerships with the public sectorand the community, as appropriate, tocarry out and manage key elements in designand development.

To view the enthusiasm of citizens as animportant assist in marketing the project and itsfuture management.

To utilize the resources of the private sector tobring to the design process, the media, the publicsector and to other institutional entities itsexpeftise and knowledge in educating andcommunicating issues and concems; and,conversely, to listen to and try to understand theconcems of the public sector and the community.

To develop through its own resources andinstitutions, a coordinated research program thataddresses specific, key urban design issues andresearch topics of common concern, and tocommunicate the findings in a clear andobjective manner.

7 Urban Design Education

tlr Jir/

I ..r,ll

The Professions Just as participatory processes are redefining theroles of govemment, citizens and the privatesector, professionalism itself is being redefined.

For a long period, indeed for most of this centuryarchitects designed buildings that were primarilyfor their clients and only secondarily for thecontext in which they were sited. The notion ofthe architect as artist and of the building as a

habitable sculpture not only dominated theprofessiort's view of itself, but it coincided with thepublic's expectation. This elitist and selfserving

beaux arts image of the architect-as-artist was

reinforced by our schools of architecture, by

architectural joumals (most of which still tend tocelebrate architecture as "art"), and by the media.

The pressure on the architect to change his basic

approach to design has come from many sources

and taken many forms. As already noted, civilunrest in American cities, and recently inEuropean cities also, has underscored the fact thatnot any one issue but the interrelationship ofmany issues has led citizens, particularly young

men and women at the thresholds of their lives, tovent their frustrations in the street.

How else do people have to tell deaf peers ingovemment and business that paychecks relate tohousing, that relevant schooling relates to the past

and future of local cultures as well as to jobs, thathome ownership means having a stake as a citizenin one's community, and that a person's culturalorigin, his accent, his clothes, the street he liveson, or the color of his skin cannot any longer be

accepted as the measure of his potential?

Perhaps it requires extreme situations to bore intothe national consciousness that ways exist alreadyin which multiple issues can be handled, and thatthese ways, far from undermining our society, lie atits political roots. Clearly, economics is as

important as demography, social psychology as

important as political science. That these can andshould inform the design of physical environmentsis obvious. I-ess obvious, but equally persuasive is

that it's a two-way street. The design of a school is

related to curriculum; the design of housing is theshape of neighborliness. And both are the body-language of our social intent.

But like architecture, most of the professionaldisciplines have over decades grown apart anddeveloped separate specializations. In spite of theircommon social focus, they do not easily cross-

fertilize today. Th"y speak a different language.Their premises are different. \7e have set up ourhigher education administrations and curricula onthe basis that they are and will remain separate. Inmany universities, professors of economics don teven know the names of professors of sociology orlaw or architecture. Much less the chairman ofdifferent departments or the deans of separate

co[eges are willing to devise educational programs

in which their disciplines interrelate in the publicinterest. Consequently, enormous barriers oflanguage and methodologies have been erectedthat must be overcome if the common issues of ourcities are to be addressed.

88 Urban Design: AnEvotuing Skill

A brief definition of urban design is "design in anurban context." That sounds innocuous enoughnot to cause offense to anyone. But design is usedhere, not in its traditional narrow sense, but in amuch broader way. Economic ptojections,packaging new developments, negotiatingpublic/private financial partnerships, setting upguidelines and standards for historic revitalization,forming non-profit corporations that combinecitizens with public and private sector financingresources, are all considered as design. And urbancontext means the specific local context in whichthe design project is to occur.

The impact of all this on architecture is profound.It is no coincidence that along with the newconcem for localism comes the expansion of thearchitect's traditional role into the realm of urbandesign. Architects in growing numbers have cometo recognize that cities are living organisms whoselifeblood is local culture and tradition, and thatnew buildings are the city's way of renewing itself,adding new life and impetus to its own pafticularevolution as a place. And developers of newprojects are also realizing in growing numbers thatthe pride of citizens in their city and theirbuildings pays remarkable dividends.

The other specialist disciplines are rapidlyexpanding their traditional roles into urban designalong similar lines. It has therefore become morecritical than ever for members of each discipline tounderstand the languages and inputs ofthe others.

ffitt'ttt...

Drawing as urban design explorationDrawing is the primary language of architects. Butarchitects entering the urban design field are

having to develop new techniques to deal with so

many different and simultaneous inputs. Urbandesign drawings tend to begin by being soft,generalized, diagrammatic. Configurations incharcoal, pastel or felt pens on onion skinsabound, soft lozenges assailed by arrows. Moreconventional arrows may represent traffic flows,

volumes, peaks; or wind direction, tremuloussummer breezes or the snow-laden scything gales ofwinter; or contour and vista. Smudges may suggest

building mass, or hill mass, or a screen of trees. Butother lozenges and arrows may deal with othermatters less physical. They may represent rates ofhistorical change and indicate the history of thefuture; they may tell us about resources and theflow of capital and operational money; they mightindicate opportunities, constraints and altemativestrategies of phasing.Th.y can diagramsociological factors such as unemployment,conflict or crime, stability or transience,gentrification or the corrosion of blight; or theymight diagram economic factors such as

projections of market absorption; or proceduralfactors such as permissible densities, uses, andheights. Drawn to scale, one diagram can even fitover anotheq describing the interaction ofcomplex factors in plan and section on a particularsite, and be summarized by word diagrams loadedwith quantifications.

90 As such a process of drawing moves forwad,building up layers of information, perception and

understanding, it approaches closer and closer tothe physical goals of urban design, an architectureof the man-made environment that is an organicand appropriate local fit. Inside becomes related tooutside. Space is related to time. Contemporarymaterials are related to the inherited environment.Form is related to contour, climate and usage. Mass

and penetration are related to vista. Drawing isexploration, and exploration is a process of self-

definition, a gradually clarifuing focus, until theobject is just right.

Translating complex strands intourban designL.ooking at our modem traditions of painting and

sculpture we can see the same process of self-

clarification occurring in a cubist painting orcollage, or in the drip canvases of Jackson Pollock,and we can see insideness and outsideness, space

and time, light and shadow, plane and linearityunited in a dynamic and endless flow in theconstructivist sculptures of Pevsner and Gabo.And the same continuities exist in the buildingplans of early Mies, [.e Corbusieq and Wright.Indeed the new urban design drawing techniques,in the simultaneity of their explorations of thedynamics of physical situation are intellectuallymore contemporary and modem than the formaleclecticism of the so-called post-modemists.

But just as architects who enter urban design haveto leam how to translate interdisciplinary inputsinto drawings and threedimensional models, it isalso important for economists, sociologists,political scientists and others to understand theexploratory techniques and cultural concems ofarchitects. It can't be a one-way street. Citizens,who have no intellectual inhibitions about howarchitectural drawings should or should not bedone, have found little difficulty in understandingurban design drawings and diagrams, and are notshy about making suggestions, or themselvesadding to drawings.

Decentralizing urban design and architecturaResponding to pressures from citizens for deepersensitivity and more detailed understanding oflocal issues and dynamics, many public planningdepartments have decentralized their personneland even their offices. During the past ten years,

more and more planning meetings, shopfrontstudios and architectural presentations of everykind have been opened up for public inputand criticism.

The language of architecture has begun to changedramatically as a result of urban design, and theeffects are to be seen in many cities. The prevalentnotion that a new building is an idiosyncratic andeclectic art object inserted into a city has begun togive way to the notion that a new building can be

a carefully wrought response to the inherited localcontext without being any less contemporary.

N\\|*b

92 And so urban design, as an extension of thephysical designer's traditional skill, has become a

means of exploration, a way of determining notonly physical forms, but what the impacts ofphysical forms would be on, say, social pattems, oreconomics, or on the city's tax base, if the design

took this form in contrast to that. At the same

time, urban design has also become a means ofassisting communities themselves to explore andamphfr their o\r,rl perceptions of their futures; and

with each new project to readiust and enrichtheir policies.

\Uhen R/UDATs began in 1967, the "state of theart" in pafticipatory urban design was veryprimitive. Jb make matters more difficult, the fewprofessionals in the nation who were involved inparticipatory design were working, as we have

pointed out, in isolation, unaware that otherarchitects and planners shared similar concems.

There were no forums of exchange. Sometimesinnocent procedural mistakes led to difficult andunnecessary situations. Some of the early meetings

in Pontiac became so heated that policesurveillance had reluctantly to be requested and

arrests were made. In a similar public process inAnn Arbor, confrontations between neighborhoodpeople and city agencies was fomented by activistuniversity groups. But lessons of procedure were

forged in these early fires, and the rapid evolutionof the R/UDAT progmm from similarly simple and

obscure beginnings into a process that could be

adapted by private sector professionals became

important and influential.

RiUDAC had a profound effect on the work these

isolated professionals were doing. They offered aseries of concrete examples of what could happenwhen interdisciplinary teams respond in a spirit ofaccountability to the concems of citizens. As soonas the professionals - not only architects, butprcfessionals from other disciplines as well -hear,C about R/UDAT they volunteered to get onthe teams, and took back to their practices thelessons they leamed firsthand. And the AIAsUrban Design and Planning Committee became aforum of orchange.

Participatory design: what happens inprivate practiceAt first glance it probably seems that a fourdayRruDAf cannot have much in common with aprofessional design process. The fact is thatR/UDAT offers in a concentrated form a prccess

that is readily adaptable to private sector practice.

The accompanying chart shows the main steps

that occur in a participatory design process inprivate sector practice. Generally such a process

lasts three to six months. Some are shorter; otherscan be considerably longer. But their products are

developed in far greater detail than therecommendations that emerge from a typicalR/UDA[, and their goal is to move directly fromplanning into implementation.

How R/UDATAffects Private

Practice

Step IThe citizen's steeringcommittee and theconsultant team meetand work togetherthroughout the urbanrlesign process.

Step 2Perceptions of citizensof goals and issuesare sought throughinterviews, groupmeetings, andquestionaires.

Sfep 3Normal planningdata base.

Step 4The steeringcommitee and theconsultant teamprepare a preliminaryprogram with astatement of priorities.

Step 5The materials fromStep 4 are presentedat a public meeting fordebate. This meetingshould be widelypublicized to ensureattendance of allconcerned citizens.

bp.^ ftrr'Pu*tc --bi.,r;gz1

ftlcctttrog Irfu{u,Ht Izllti'*..+ua IDts,;r^ e t

hcrlr^f.",t{

Step 6On the basis ofexpressed concernsand priorities, theconsultant team andthe steering commiteeconduct workshopson components of theprogram at whichcitizens and agenciescan work together.

Step 7On the basrb of theWorkshops a programis developed.

Step IAlternative urbandesigns and strategiesare developed by theconsultant team.

Sfap 9A joint Workshop onthe alternative is heldfor those whoattended the earlierworkshops 6tep 6)

ftrdta 11l".^fl

Step lOA public meeting isheld to consider thealternatives and todeterminea "preferred"alternative.

Sraps ll-r4The preferredalternative isdeveloped in detaileddesigns andrecommendations,with a first phase ofimplementationbuilt in.

96 ChartThe following is a brief description of the steps inwhich the chart illustrates.

Participatory design in practice moves throughthree distinct phases: contexts, concepts, and

actions. The following are some general remarks.

l. Contexts

a. lnterviews, questionnaites, gtoup meetingsLike R/UDA[, the construction of a data base with"hard" and "soft" information is the basis for openpublic meetings.

ttHarrd" information is drawn from the same

sources as in R/UDA[ but generally in far greater

detail; statistical demographics, building uses and

conditions, valuations, tax information, etc. Some

of the work in this category may be done by sub-

consultants to the team, for example marketeconomists or traffic engineers.

Close collaboration with public agencies, theChamber of Commerce, institutions such as

banks, universities and hospitals, and groups such

as merchants associations, neighborhoodorganizations, etc., is advisable in building up a

"hard" data base. These agencies have usefulresources, and it is good politics to collaborate.

"Soft" information is generally put together inthree ways: interviews, questionnaires, andgroup meetings.

Interviews are different from casual conversationswith citizens. They have to be carefully structured,and generally occur once the team and thesteering committee have established what themain issues are. Each interview should be plannedto last at least an hour, and should be built up on'tonversation topics" that are designed to shed

sharp light on the issues and to raise new issues.

The people to be interviewed are carefully chosenby the team and the steering committee together,with an eye to include unfavorable or criticalviewpoints as well as favorable ones, and also toget the best range of insights and perceptions inthe community.

Questionnaires, on the other hand, should be

designed for the widest possible circulation. Th.yshould be simple, but they should also encourage

people to write longer answers than simply "yes"or "no'1 A good vehicle for distribution is the localnewspaper. TV and radio newscasters can be asked

to urge viewers and listeners to fill them in.

Group meetings should be organized as discussionworkshops. Like the interviews, these discussionsshould be built up on the issues. Typical groups are

the elderly, minorities, merchant associations, andneighborhood coalitions.

-_.flq

b. IssuesParticipatory design just doesn't occur unless there

are issues: people dont tum up without reason.

Issues will have been identified in the RFP. Theywill have formed the basis of the interviews,

questionnaires and group meetings. But once these

inputs have been made, the chances are good thatthe issues will have to be revised and new issues

will have to be added. The team will have leamed

many new insights and will have been pointed inthe direction of many new sources of research and

information. All of this material now requires

careful tabulation.

c. fluman nesources

The interviews and group meetings will also begin

to reveal what special human resources are to be

found concealed in the community. Every

community provides its own rich surprises. If theteam keeps its ears and eyes open it will find local

"authorities" on almost every subject. Historicphotographs, artifacts, business recorrCs,

architectural drawings, etc., will be discovered

stacked away in private houses. There are rich oral

histories to be taped and meaningful local

traditions to be reconCed. This wealth ofinformation often makes splendid material forrelease to the press in the team's effort to get

public momentum behind the process.

irlft"!:,,1i0_H

rr.. *.'li;i;$.i,

wJr?i*tr*

iais(x(-iE, L r\. .'i- \= . . \,.' :\s:*:.r. . I {'f {i.Lq.ri''*l!''.: \::r,---+ll_.1r _ra' -----J.L 2s -

-ONE HUNDP,D I]Ttr'ITY TADT STPEET

M{AL DEYELOPMENT IN P,ESIDE}ICE DISTUCT

/-rdyt

98 d. Analysis and synthesisThe team now puts together what it has leamed."Hard" and "soft" information is reviewed incategories, and gaps in information are

established. Perceptions can be quantified (e.g.,

how many people mentioned the river as anoverlooked resource, how many people ratedsecurity as a priority, what percentage ofrespondents thought that race was an issue), andeven though the sample may be very small, thetabulation could be a useful indicator. Base maps

keyed to the information are particularly useful(e.g., where in the city exactly was crime identifiedas an issue, what street intersection was identifiedas the most dangerous, etc).

The information bank is now assembled in largegraphic documents that can be used at the firstopen public sessions and town meetings.

e. Town meetingThe open public sessions are as vitally importantto urban design in private practice as they are toR/UDAG. The media once again plays a big partin the success of town meetings. The key is to get

everyone involved who wants to be, and to make

involvement meaningful. Articles in the press

based on interviews and background informationshould be published daily. Handbills and bannersadvertising the public meeting make good videomaterial for TV news bulletins, and call-in talkshows on radio help keep the public'sinterest soaring.

At least one big town meeting should be held atthis point in the process. Be sure to have a haIllarge enough for a good crowd. Five or six hundredpeople is not unusual. Generally, the agenda is intwo parts. The first part is a plenary session,

chaired by the steering committee, at which arepoft on what has been leamed so far is made bythe consultants. The issues are then analyzed.After a coffee break, the public is asked to attend a

workshop of its choice. Aim at about fiveworkshops. Each workshop will address an issue ora cluster of issues. Typical workshops might be

conservation, traffic and parking, housing, oremployment and financial incentives. After theworkshops, which last about 50 minutes, the TownMeeting is reconvened and the chairman of eachworkshop makes a brief repoft on his session, so

that everyone knows what happened in allthe workshops.

.t^. LV,ACHIN4

2. Concepts

The purpose of the workshops is to narrow thefocus of discussion to particulars. As a result theteam should have a fairly good insight of the needsand expectations of the community. They are nowin a position to draw and make recommendations.

The chart suggests that three main altemativesought to be developed. The number of altemativesis up to the team. Perhaps altematives is the wrongword, since it suggests complete designs. Scenariosmight be a better word. Or better still "what if'scenarios. What if we do this? Altemativelywhat would happen if we went in a totallydifferent directionl

Each scenario has a program, priorities, timetable,budget, incentives, impacts and level ofaccountability. These can be evaluated objectivelyin terms of risk compared with benefit, and costcompared with capital source and retum oninvestment. Each scenario implies a series ofpolitical and financial strategies. And finally eachscenario can be evaluated in terms of its probablelevel of acceptance with the community.

When enough scenarios and program-mixes havebeen worked through in three-dimensional designsas well as in numbers, the time has come for asecond big open public meeting. Preparations forthe public meeting will include the carefulpresentation of altematives, with particularemphasis of risks, outlays, phasing and benefits.

It is important that the second Town Meeting is

run by the steering committee and not by theconsultant team. The chairman of the steeringcommittee should in fact chair the publicmeeting. The steering committee should introducethe altematives. The consultant team is called onto present the details.

Once again the Jbwn Meeting should be in twoparts, plenary session and workshops. At theplenary session the altematives are presented anddebated. Then once again the public should beasked to attend a workshop of their choice. Thepurpose of the workshops this time is to discuss

critically how the team has responded in each

program area, and prioritize preferences. After theworkshops the Town Meeting is reconvened, andthe reports from the workshops will be debated.

A picture of the preferred scenario should emerge

from the Town Meeting and from a follow-upmeeting of the steering committee.

100 3. Actions

The team is now in a position to move into thefinal design phase.

It is important to emphasize once again thatdesign is not meant only in the narrower

architectural sense of physical and visual design,

but also as the design of politicalrecommendations, financial pro formas, revisions

to regulations, incentives, funding resources andrequests, etc. Some consultant teams include a

member with experience in development to helpin these areas.

The goal of this phase is to bring the first phases ofthe project to the threshold of implementation. Itis therefore crucial that design is bothcomprehensive and detailed. The very nature ofcontextual design is that new proposals are

sensitively meshed with the city around them. Atthe same time the proposals have to work in anexacting arena where harsh terns are imposed by

developers' pto formas, the requirements oflenders, and the phasing of public capital, andwhere things take unexpected twists and tums,such as the eccentricities of the marketplace orthe rise and fall of interest rates.

In most situations today involving large projects,

private sector commitments will be negotiated upto a certain point, but will not be finalized untilpublic capital commitments have been made.

Bond issues may have to be voted upon. A federal

Urban Development Action Grant (UDAG) may

have to be negotiated.

These commitments rely in turn on a public

approvals process. This is where evidence of a good

history of accountability becomes a

real asset.

Urban Design: Anlnstitutional Skill

Because of its interdisciplinary base, urban designhas no home in any of the existing professions orinstitutions. It has problems of a commonlanguage. And it suffers from the lack of formalizedprocedures between disciplines involved insimilar issues.

To compound these problems each of thedisciplines that urban design processes bringtogether has its own existing professional institutewith inherent policies and rules of membership,licensing, accreditation, focus and direction. Andthe majority of their members may not even wantto accommodate interdisciplinary processes in case

they weaken their institute's monopolistic controlof their specialization.

We have to recognize that even withinarchitecture, not every architect has the desire orcapacity to be an urban designer. Althougharchitecture is a team profession, demandingdifferent talents and specializations within itsgeneralist framework, urban design demands abroadening of teams and a complexity far beyondanything experienced within architecture before.

However, recent years have demonstrated beyonddoubt that everyone involved in the art of citybuilding must be required to understand the basicprocesses and language of urban design, and we

believe that one of the challenges now facing us is

to get other professional discipline.s to understandand want this as well.

For more effective practice of urban design,the following sfeps should be taken:First and foremost it is imperative to institution,alize urban design on an interdisciplinary basis.

This can be done either as an integral part of theprofession of architecture (since it is the onlyprofession which deals with overall physical, three-dimensional products) or as a separate profession

that has the ability to pull together andcoordinate appropriate segments of otherprofessional disciplines.

The R/UDAT progmm, apart from its impact onthe nation's cities, is an important thresholdwithin the architectural profession. The AIA canno longer deny that its most successful publicdemonstration is in urban design, not architecture.Variants on R/UDAf intemationally, notablyCAUSE in Canada and CUDAf in Great Britain,have carried the message to other countriesand continents.

But the recent formation of a separate nationalInstitute for Urban Design is likely to be of crucialimportance. [ts intemational conferences andurban design publications have already increased

recognition of urban design as a distinctinterdisciplinary skill. All the professions anddisciplines involved in urban design should be

encouraged to support and pafticipate in theInstitute, not for what it already is, but for what itcan become.

For example, interdisciplinary partnerships inresearch and publications can be built up, either as

individual projects or based on theinterdisciplinary workshops which the Institute is

already holding so effectively in cities around thenation. For its part, the lnstitute can set upworking liaisons with the institutes of relatedprofessions to explore how urban design can be anintegral part of overall purposes by including it as a

mandatory element in its continuing educationand recertification programs, its formation andresource dissemination systems and its research

efforts and agenda.

Both the Institute for Urban Design and the AIAshould work together to make urban design anintegral part of the practice of architecture so thatarchitects can enlarge their responsibilities byserving the community, either by establishing a

design process which utilizes an intedisciplinaryapproach, or by participating in a meaningful *yas a concemed citizen in someone else's process.

These goals will not be realized until urban designis a core program in all schools of architecture. To

treat urban design as an elective, or as a master's

program, is not sufficient any longer. We mustdevelop new ways for the next generation ofprofessional architects to exercise their designskills in the new contexts of social andurban awareness.

Rene DuBos spoke to this issue in his 1969 PulitzerPrize-winning book, So Human An Animal:

"Since manls nsture leals him to search endlcssly forrlew envirorwwnts *rdf* new aduentwres, tlwre is nopossibility of moinarning a stttw qrn. Euen if we had

enoughleanwg urd wisdam to achieue dt an! glven

time anlwrrnoniow state of ecoln$cal equilibriurrtbetween monkind and tlw otlwr inhabiants ofspaceship Earth, it wouldbe a dyrwmic equilibriumwhich w ould be compatible with man's cartinuingdevelopment. Tllc questionis whetfur tlte interplaybetween man andhis rwtural and social sunoundings

willbe controlledb blind forces or wlrctlrcr it willbepded by dcliberate ranonal judgement."

The responsibility of our universities isto make these "blind forces" understood.Habitually schools of architecture have beenconditioned to produce graduates who fit nichesthat the profession and society has predefined forthem. Professional schools still follow pattemsgovemed by the vested and conservative interests

that provide commissions for the big architecturaloffices, and by the subtle (but no less lowerful)pressures of institutional accrediting boards. Butthe rate of social change has accelerated to a pointthat this educational model is no longer viable.The graph of change in technology alone isnearly veftical.

Urban design andschools of

architecture.

The education of architects is only one facet ofurban design education. The interdisciplinarynetwork that urban design represents can now be

seen to expand in the university, correlating inputsand leaming experiences from many directions.But the network within the university should also

be seen as a microcosm of the network in theurban workshop itself.

ln a democracy the informed citizen has a right toexpect officials and representatives elected in hisbehalf to act in his best interests. It is a preciousright, not only because the election booth is anexpression of trust and aspiration, but the process

of removing officials who do not meetexpectations, and reversing decisions that do notreflect the public will is enorrnously difficult to putinto effect by means other than elections. Sadly,

these remedies of process are usually too late. Thedeed is done. Historic buildings are razed; budgetsare spent; a park has been paved; a highway has

been rammed through; an unsatisfactory projecthas been built; and urban evolution has beenperrnanently diverted.

Getting public officials to be sensitive to theaspirations of citizens and to understand theimpacts of their policies and decisions is animportant aspect of urban design communications.Carefully prepared presentations at public hearings

and informed media are important components ineducating govemment.

But this will always be unpredictable until theeducation of planners, architectural historians,political scientists, sociologists, urban economistsand many others is based on interdisciplinaryworkshops, the language of which is urban design.Orlv in this way will standards of intenCisciplinaryperformance in public professional life be set, andaccountability in the public interest will be

quantifiable and less a matter of rhetoric.

Educatinggovernment

Urban design researchlt is clear that fundamental to good design andcommunication is sound research. Urban designresearch is contextual in nature. It has certaincharacteristics that differentiate it from research inother fields, and in a sense these characteristicsmake it more difficult to do. Like urban designitsel( urban design research is generalist. It coversseveral related specialist areas, but its goal is tosupport design in the public interest, and is

therefore different. It is not surprising to find thatthere is currently a shortage of urban designresearch. And what is done suffers from variousdeficiencies that have to be overcome. Here are

some shortfalls:

r Most of the research is done by single disciplines,and has a narroq unilateral point of view.

o Useful research findings are not in easilycommunicable form or readily available topracticing urban designers, and are not beingemployed effectively, if at all, by localgovemment.

o A wealth of researchable information is notutilized.

o \7hi1e universities and research institutionsshould continue to be primarily centers forurban design research, such research should notbe conducted exclusively by them.

o Comparative case studies are needed todocument and update successes and failures inurban design.

o Many individual research projects are carried outwith an inadequate frame of reference.

A 'tulture of researctt'', on a sound, broadlyaccepted methodological basis, is needed withinthe interdisciplinary urban design profession. Itsmethodologies should be designed to provide

overall and commonly accepted research

management strategies to enable research invarious institutions, universities and agencies to be

coordinated in regard to direction, quality andcomparison. Research findings will thus becomeinvaluable resources for policy formulation andfunding mechanisms.

Creating optionsUrban design is concemed with creating valuable

new options in old or new contexts, rather thanapplying systems already in existence. Besides

monitoring case studies, research should also

therefore be a tool in the process of activeexperimentation that is integral to the sequence ofany proj ect's organization, implementationand evaluation.

Carefully planned projects considered to be

important arenas for research work should be

supported to permit consistency over a long periodof time beyond implementation to permitmonitoring and comparisons with similar projects

in other contexts. This would allow processes to be

tried, retried, and adopted, building on results ofprevious efforts.

106 A central clearinghouseA pressing need is a central clearinghouse ofurban design research and case studies. This may

be a task for the Institute for Urban Design, notunlike the parallel work being done by the UrbanLand Institute. Universities as well as professionals

should subscribe to and support the effort. Case

studies based on performance criteria are ofpafticular importance to pmcticing urban

designers and to govemment.

Urban design often involves the creation of costlyand relatively permanent environmental features.

The urban designer must worry about theconsequences of everything he does, not onlybecause people are going to be living with the

results, but because he is sometimes substantiallychanging the course of a city's future. So, whatever

experimentation is done must be of a type thatallows adjustments to be made and failures to be

corrected. Research into parallel projects, and intothe sequential steps of his project, is therefore aninvaluable tool, and informed feedback can lead toa better informed accommodation of needs orchanges in programs.

Contextual rcsearchContextual research, project-by-project, may be

organized as parallel comparative case studies,

going over a period of years. It can be carried outas an integral part of the designdecision-implementation-management process of eachproject, built in from the beginning. Howeveq

research has to be consistent to be of maximumuse, and must be based on the interrelatedness ofall of the steps in the entire design process. It must

deal with how design accommodates successive

programmatic or policy adaptations, and it must be

undertaken in the context of real people andevents. Some of the researchers should, if possible,

be the citizens themselves.

Further research strategies to be considered are

projective. \7e might call them trickle-up.Projections based on case studies evaluated by

means of accepted methodologies can be

invaluable. Depending on the issues at hand,funding and other capabilities, trickle-up and post-

construction research may be conducted on aperiodic rather than continuous basis.

Tiickle-up research, like much scientific research,

begins with a focus on a concrete problem, and

works its way outward to larger contextual issues,

and finally to projections. The implication is that,by choosing several contexts as important areas forresearch, it would be possible to amass

considerable specific information fromwhich important generalizations and proj ections

could be drawn.

fust construction evaluationPost-construction evaluation can focus onenvironments that are working well comparedwith those that are not, in order to develop anunderstanding of the factors leading to projectviability, successful and unsuccessful. Althoughevaluations tend to be statistical in order toestablish a basis for comparison, it is alsoimportant to trace back "soft" data, such as theimpact of decision-making, and in the hght ofexperience, to project what the impact ofaltemative goals, strategies, decisions or policiesmight have been.

Evaluations of this kind provide excellent staffleaming experiences when developed fromcompleted projects contrasted with originalintentions and are useful as demonstrations toelected officials. Based on such evaluations, futureprogramming can be altered, public policy may bemodified, and the general public can review earlierdecisions in the light of new information.

Potential areas of research, therefore, that may be

considered are:e design administrationodesign legislation.design issueso communication and education. urban design communicationso publ ic/private partnershipsocomparative impacts on urban economics,

sociology, demography, etc.

Rene DuBos in the 1970 Smiduonian

Qumterly said:

"Noru that socbl and technolngical clwnges are too

rapid for tlw sponwneow dc,uebyrwnt of xtccessful

alaptiu e resporues 'r.adelTl socierles will lrau e to

depend on conscious derig, far tlw achievenent of

fiuwss.I yefer to speak of 'design' ratlvr than

'planning' because I want n emphasize tlw need nsocial and ecolagical patterns in which tlw potcntialities

of persons and places con achieve expressions whichme humanly desirable."

Because physical design is visual language,

architects are able to make connections betweeninformation distilled from research and three-

dimensional physical expression. They are also

able to discem or derive meaning in visual form

from human aspirations expressed both directlyand from case studies. They have not always, inrecent history brought this ability to bear onissues of the public interest, preferring insteadto narow their effective field to moreprivate interests.

The experience and methods of R/UDAG have

eloquently catalogued the publict desire to give

form to its environment, and have demonstrated

with conviction the effectiveness ofinterdisciplinary teamwork in which expertise is

additive, and in which all physical and culturalforces combine to resolve issues of conflict in acreative manner.

Comparative research, as outlined here, coupledwith open, participatory design processes, offers

opportunities to enrich design and informs thepublic in the Jeffersonian sense. It also enlarges

the role that our universities and design schools

can play in the future of our cities.

t08 \7hi1e the 100 or so collegiate schools that offerthe education of design professionals are

superficially encouraged to develop their ownpriorities, there is a marked agreement betweenthem as to what constitutes a responsiblecurriculum. It is certainly ironic that at atime when citizens are searching for aninterCisciplinary focus on the issues of changeimpacting urban communities, the trend towardspecialization has left us with fewer and fewerprofessionals trained to accept the challenge ininterd isc ipl inary teamwork.

Four areas of instruction appear in all programs

with varying percentages of time allotted to them:design, history theory and building technology.Noticeably missing are cources that recognize thatparallel disciplines can and do also affectarchitectural and urban form. There is, in fact,very little instruction on the source of appropriateform itself.

A study commissioned by the AIA admits thesimilarity among schools. Core requirementsremain structure, history and design, with theacknowledged primary emphasis in the designstudio. The traditional design studios still dealwith problem solution rather than problemdefinition, and tend to do this as architecturaldesign in isolation rather than ininterdiscipl inary settings.

In contrast design education, to be reflective ofpublic concems and issues, should offeropportunities to develop skills that are responsive

to the continuously changing conditions of ourcities - conditions which in tum must be seen as

the basis for physical form.

New curricula must be developed in design schoolsto sharpen the skills needed to define issues,

encourage dialogue, collect and analyze

information, and understand the processes ofurban change. Courses must be offered that makeclear how economic, social and politicalpernutations can be generators of altemativephysical form in given local contexts. Indeed,schools may consider making the urban contextsall around them, wherever they are located, theirprimary workshops or living laboratories.

To some extent this has already begun. In the mid-sixties interdisciplinary research and workshopswere organized by Kevin Irynch and DonaldAppleyard at the Massachusetts Institute ofGchnology, while a parallel attempt was made byDavid kwis to use Pittsburgh as an urbanworkshop by the graduate program in urban designat Camegie lnstitute of Gchnology (now

Camegie-Mellon University). In the seventiesmore universities joined in. Yale in New Haven,Connecticut; Ohio State in Columbus; and theUniversity of Califomia at Berkeley are notableexamples of universities which offered urbandesign workshops to address specific issues in theirown communities, in collaboration with citizensand govemment.

Recent examples indicate that big steps forwanC

are being made to institutionalize these efforts andorganize them rationally. Mississippi StateUniversity has the Center for Small TownResearch and Design organized by James Barkerwhich runs projects and publishes a series ofimportant case studies in book form, and the series

of publications put out by the student program ofNorth Carolina State University is a basis for anorganized body of theory and case studies.

Like case studies, history must also be consideredin context with the cultural forces that created itso that the student can better understand how, inthe past, the forces of politics, economics,sociology, etc., were translated into design andform. [n this way th'e present and future can beseen as history in the making.

Schools of architecture, through their design

studios, can become the catalysts forinterdisciplinary partnerships with the university.Th.y should combine the interdisciplinaryopportunities of research, and they can generate

resource material that is transdisciplinary finding a

way to share it with students and teachers in otherdisciplines and also with cities, govemmentagencies and others that might use it.

Design studios will thus begin to reinterprer rhetraditional role of the university in communityservice, and make the idea of community servicecurricular rather than extracurricular. This willbring people, problems and issues into the core ofthe university as living resources in the setting ofpractical urban workshops.

8 Synthesis

tt2 Urban design isarchitecture

I Synthesis

All art is image. Even the opaque silences ofcomposer John Cage are images of the absence ofsound. Urban design offers images of the future ofthe city. These images permit us to focus withintensity and detail on the policies and strategies

of achieving that future.

This book began with a spontaneous visit to TheAmerican Institute of Architects by a citizen whohad a perception that his community had

problems that possibly architects could help with.The first R/UDAT quickly discovered that the cityis a living organism, embodying the culture,history and aspirations of its citizens. They sensed

its continual change, its continual evolution from

its past into future forms. But most of all they

sensed that the citizens themselves wanted to helpto shape that future: they implicitly recognized

that any given moment in the history of thedemocratic city, the policies which will shape its

future must be in their own hands.

From simple beginnings, R/UDAI evolved into a

process which draws from the present condition,from the existing context of the city, all theelements from which the image of the city's futuremust take its shape. No one mind, no matter how

brilliant, indeed not even one profession, is

capable of spanning the width and depth ofunderstanding needed to handle the diversity ofthis material. R/UDAI teams are therefore drawnfrom a national pool of men and women

specialists, each eminent in his own field ofendeavor, representing a range of disciplines toensure that the recommendations that emerge are

truly responsive to the complex strands of inputand data that bombard the urban design process

from all sides.

But the city does not belong to the assistance

teams. Th.y come from all parts of the nation andstay for only four days. The odds are that they have

never visited that particular city before, norpreviously met the other team members, and ifthey have, certainly not in an intensiveinterrdisciplinary working situation. Be that as itmay, the essence of the R/UDAT is that it serves,

not the professionals, but the cause of the citizens.It is they who come to the team seeking help inachieving for their city a series of aspirations thatare extremely precious to them. And in coming tothe team they are symbolizing and expressing thebasic democratic form of cities, in which every

front door is connected to every other front door,

and every citizen has a clear and equal relationshipin govemment, articulated by the physical gridof the city.

4::.t;,...,':;ill.,.,,11,,.,ti

';,,,,,,1"'it,r,1ll"'h',,' ft,,f i,p

Synthesis

RJUDAT is not called to go to cities in which all is

well. On the contrary, R/UDAT is a response by

the architectural profession to a catl for help fromthe nation's distressed cities. Conflict, despair,

confusion of goals, ways and means - all of these

are factors that are the common fare of RJUDAG.In fact, it is the resolution of these contradictions

that offers the best opportunities for creativity.

And in an open public process, in which everyone

hears everyone else's input to the discussion andparticipates in the development ofrecommendations, the language of urban design is

bom. In the end it is the artist within the urbandesigner - part troubadour, part alchemist - whois able to make that creative and emotionaflymoving leap of insight and comprehensive

understanding necessary for an inspired yet

credible image. But because the citizens have

participated in the birth of that language and inits development toward the articulation of policiesthey can deeply believe in, a new spirit ofoptimism and dedication and new leaderships

come into being which will carry their communityforwarrd to new horizons.

The images of urban design are, therefore, trulyimportant when their threedimensionaldepictions of proposals and projects are thelanguage of detailed focus and intention. But mostimportant of all is the image of process andenfranchisement, those powerful undercurrents ofpolicy and dedication by the citizens that will be

responsible for the delivery of consensus and forimplementing the recommendations, for these are

the raw power of urban evolution. The deeper

lesson of RJUDAI is that these are themainsprings of truly significant architecture.

Section TwoThe Regional/Urban Design AssistanceTeams in ActionPeter Batchelor

The Team in Action: An Assessment

(J, .),

/1i c1

il=p'li) ,,i+

\ilh\\iui

fi,r'r):

},J"o&\*t[{i

The Team in Action: An Assessment

Aniving from all over the nation, a group ofpersons are preparing for a R/UDAI project. Theirmission is to give design and planning assistance

to a community. Th.y have received a package ofmaterial in advance of the visit in order that they

may familiarize themselves with the characteristics

of the community and the problems they are likelyto encounter.

Their professional background is very diverse.

Th.y may be drawn from architecture, landscape

architecture, city planning, transportationplanning, economics, [aw, sociology and many

other disciplines. Their skills and professional

activities differ greatly from each other: Some are

involved in waterfront land development projects,

others in highway design, and still others inwriting. Yet they all have one thing in common: Asuong commitment to improving the quality oflife in cities. The R/UDAI visit which brings

them together will result in proposals which reflectthe diversity of value systems on the team.

One of the team members is designated as a leader.

He or she has been carefully chosen to manage theR/UDAT event so that it is productive andmeaningful to the participants. The team leader

must represent the findings of the team to the

community, and must be able to organize the effortintemally. Such a person requires enorrnous

amounts of energy, patience and good humor.

Gctful when differences occur, adept at bringingthe most creative response from individuals, the

team leader must know enough about theprofessional backgrounds of team members inorder to make sound judgements. And in the early

hours of the moming when time and space hover

on the edge of consciousness, and when the mindis wearied by round-the clock activity, the leader

must be on hand to encoutage and support team

effiort. Not surprisingly, a few natural leaders have

emerged in the R/UDAT process and their skillsare called upon with great frequency.

Over the course of several months, perhaps even as

much as a year or more, a task force has beenpreparing for this event. Reconnaisance visits are

made to the community for the purpose ofmeeting local officials and assessing the nature ofthe issues to be addressed. local committees andcontacts are established and a list of key actors -businessmen, politicans, professionals andcommunity leaders - is prepared. The localchapter of the American Institute of Architects is

involved in planning for the visit, and wherepossible schools of architecture and city planningare invited to send faculty and students to assist inR/UDAT sessions. A lot of time and energy isspent in preparing for a visit because it is essentialto secure the active support and participation ofthe community, and because the team can spendtheir time more effectively responding to the localproblems if sufficient background information is

available. The existence, for example, of aproperly-scaled set of reproducible base maps has adramatic impact on the output of a team and thespecificity of the product.

At some point late in the preparatory phase a teamis identified by both the R/UDAf Thsk Force andthe team leader. The unique strengths of a pool ofseveral hundred volunteers are known, andindividuals are selected on the basis of their abilityto contribute to specific planning and designissues. Also important is the ability of the teammember to contribute to the success of the visit, a

factor which places cooperation on an equal

footing with individual creativity and skill. Out ofthe process of selection is forged a team - theRegional/Urban Design Assistance Team - whose

separate strengths are brought to focus on a

common problem.

The Regional/Urban Design Assistance Team is a

unique assembly of talented people. It meets forfour or five days at one location in the UnitedStates. Some team members may know each other,or may have heand of each other throughprofessional practice, but for most it is the firsttime they have assembled together. Theconvergence of these skilled professionals at thislocation and time in history is an event never tobe repeated. It is bound to influence some aspect

of community development, and yet its principalactors are only required to make a shoft termcommitment.

In or,Jer to understand how the R/UDAI process

functions, several questions must be raised: Whatis the general organizational structure of a typicalvisit, and how is the problem-solving process

conductedl How do ideas emerge, and how are

they communicatedl Finally, what are the criticalelements of the processl These questions will be

examined in the following pages and illustrated by

excerpts from seven case studies.

The Teams in Action: An Assessmenr

General Structureand Problem-solving

Process of aR/UDAT Visit

RUDAT Workshops tend to follow a fairly well-defined format. The first day is usually given overto meeting representative community groups andin becoming familiar with the physical

environment. On the second day, public hearings

and reviews of available and recently gathered datatend to sharpen the team's perception of majorissues. By the mid-point of this day preliminaryproblem statements and programs are defined, andby the end of the day a strategy for approaching

the problem is established. The third dav isessentially an "inhouse" problem.solving worksession. Finally, during the evening of the thirdday, or on the foflowing day, rccommendations are

given to the community during a publicpresentation.

The problem-solving methodology of a R/UDATworkshop is based on team discussion of conceptsfollowed by joint or individual work groups

assigned to specific segments of the program. Theassignment ptocess tends to be a voluntary act onthe part of the team member with expertise and

interest in a specific aspect of the program. Afterabout two to four hours, the team is calledtogether again and a new round of presentations is

started. This recycling of concepts brings about a

steady inflow of new ideas and a modification ofprevious ones, as well as a prolific amount ofdrawing and writing. A superhuman effort is

usually needed to bring all of the disparatematerial together, a coordinating task whichnormally falls to the team leader, or chairman. It is

an exhausting process. The team often works

around the clock to put the final document and

public presentation together.

Wilson, North Carolina, May 2-O 1974:A Typical R/UDAT ScheduleThe following itinerary reveals a general pattem ofactivities common to all R/UDAT sessions. Onthe first moming a bus loaded with officials, teammembers and students made a tour of the regionfollowed by a drive through the town itself. Thisserved to introduce the team to the regionalproblems of tUTilson and to reveal the nature of theurban and rural landscape. The aftemoon was a

mixture of meetings with town officials, walkingtours and photographic surveys of theenvironment. An evening presentation by theSecretary of North Carolinds Department ofNatural and Economic Resources, James E.

Harrington, gave the team an overview of theSpatds role in land development.

During the moming of the second day minoritygroups presented a picture of housing, employmentand social conditions to the team. Public officialswere rcquested to stay away from this meeting so

that discussion could be relatively uninhibited.This meeting proved to be fairly exciting andprompted a special investigation of Blackresidential areas.

The second and thid days of the workshopproduced a large variety of planning and designconcepts. Drawing boanCs and work surfaces were

set up in the Wilson Council Chambers, anddebris comprised of paper plates, cups andcrumpled paper began to mount up as the tempo

increased. By the end of the third evening, theteam had produced the major portion of the repoftand accompanying design concepts. Theproduction of a slide show for presentation to thepublic on the fourth evening and the printing offifty copies of the repoft were the only tasks left by

4:00 AM on the final day.

The Teams in Action: An Assessment

124 Thursday May 2Aftemoon

6:00 p.m.

10:30 p.m.

10:45 p.m.

Team members arrived atRaleigh/Durham Airport.

Gam met at 1526 GlenwoodAvenue; had dinner at VelvetCloak Inn in Raleigh.

Team arrives in \trUilson

Gam briefing session and

slide show.

Friday May 38:00-10 a.m.

10:00-12:00 a.m.

12:00-1:15 p.-.

Breakfast at Heart of WilsonMotel. City, County, Statepersons, Region "lJ' officals,community leaders, news

media, etc., in attendance.

Bus tour of Wilson andsurrounding area.

Llnch at Holiday Inn.Community kader input.Retumed to Heart of Wilson.

Team went on aerialreconnaissance, city and state

staffon walking tour.

Depart fromHeart of Wilson Motel forSilver lake Oyster Bar.

Dinner at Silver Lake Oyster

Bar and presentation by

James Harrington, SecretaryNC. Depaftment of Naturaland Economic Resources.

Team discussion at motel.Film sent outfor processing.

1:30-4:30 p.m.

5:00 p.m.

5:30-9:00 p.m.

9:00-Midnight

Saturday May 48:00-10:00 a.m.

12:30 a.m.

1:30-3:00 p.m.

3:00-6:00 p.*.

6:00-7:00 p.m.

7:00-9:00 p.m.

9:00 p.m.

Breakfast meeting withDNER and other Stateofficials. Discussion ofplanning and managementissues pertinent to city, stateand regional officials.

AIA team met with specialinterest groups and resourcepersons; continued atMunicipal Chamber.

Team lunch with staffand council.

Walk throughBusiness District.

First work session.

Jbam break

Team dinner.

Second work session

Photos sent outfor processing.

Sunday May 57:30 a.m.

8:30 a.m.

12:30 a.m.

1:30 p.m.

7:00 p.m.

Monday May 67:30 a.m.

All Day

5:30-7:00 p.*.

8:30-10:00 p.*.

11:00 p.m.

Breakfast

ThinC work session

Llnch inMunicipal Chamben.

Fourth work session.

Breakfast

Preparation of statements fornews media. Slide show forpress conference

and news media.

Gam dinner.

Public presentation

Gam members departfor home.

9:00 p.m.-4:00 a.m. Fifth work session. Work onfinal report initiated.Drawings and designconcepts finalized. Slidestaken of art work.

126 Generation andCommunication

of ldeas

\U7hile the organizational structure of a R/UDAIvisit fo[ows a predictable course, as demonstratedin the Wilson study, the origin and flow ofideas is a highly variable phenomenon. Team

members bring to each BJUDAT visit apersonalized approach to issues of urban design

which tend to act as a filter for sifting through and

discanling or incorporating information. Thereare, in addition, some recurring themes - notnecessarily conscious ones - which have a

tendency to predispose conceptual ideas towards

an array of acceptable altematives. Finally, thetechnique of communication of ideas itself acts toshape the nature of the idea. All of these factors

are dependent on the composition and skills of the

team, the imageability of the issue to be studied,

and the manner in which information about thestudy problem is obtained. Since no two situationsare alike, the conceptualization of ideas does notunfold in some steady, step-by+tep fashion.

Consequently, a RJUDAT visit is a highly creative

affair, proceeding as much by inspimtion as by

conscious management.

Ordinarily, some sort of overview or officialpresentation is made to team members before theyhave any contact with the actual site. Many civicgroups assume a positive attitude about thecommunity in an attempt to maintain aprogressive spirit. Most teams are careful toquestion speakers at this stage and to enaminedispadties between documented material andofficial views of the community. It is a period inthe process in which intuition comes into play;

clues are sought which throw light upon conflictsbetween civic agencies or upon evasive behaviorover specific planning and design issues. Duringinformal convemations and social events team

members receive a more personal set ofperceptions about local problems, thus modifyittgthe official view. Ultimately, individual and

collective opinions are held conceming planningissues, and these may be widely divergent from theofficial view.

At some point in the first day, or usually no laterthan the moming of the second day, a tour of thesite is made. This provides additional informationof a contextual nature, supplementing diagrams

and maps provided by civic and local officials.Depending on the size of the problem area, a

means of transportation is provided which affords a

comprehensive view of the community. In the case

of a suburbanizing region, or a large city, itis not unusual to utilize airplanes and helicopters.TLam members on the Butte R/UDAI visit in June1972 were taken in a small single-engine plane

over the downtown area and across the enormous

Berkeley Pit, an open-face mining operation slowly

;r.r.l;;ir .}i:

perceptuat framework for future dec is ionmak ing.Often diagrammatic in nature, these drawingsclarifu the complexity of the city and pave the wayfor a comprehensive ordering concept.

These two methods of gathering site information

- vehicular and pedestrian - serve two distinctpurposes. The former aff,ords a broad view andenables team members to comprehend thecomplete urban fabric without being distracted bydemils. The latter permits involvement with thetextures and details of the urban landscape:Buildings, trees, signs, street fumiture and so on.Architects are trained to work from a total conceptdown to details and the R/UDAI process followstraditional problem-solving methods fairly closelywhen it comes to dealing with cities. One scale ofanalysis clearly imparts a sense of structure to theproceedings, while the other providesthe content.

eating away the land on which downtown Buttewas situated. Buses and automobiles are also

utilized, though no form of transportation is moreeffective than a walk through the community.

This is an exciting moment for team members.Cameras click away steadily, freezingan urbanscene for some crucial point later in the workshopsessions after the film has been processed. Persons

with an ability to draw will be seen working on a

sketch pad with great animosity as views of the siteslip by. Line drawings proliferate during this phase

of activity: Subjects ranging from aerialperspectives of the region to physical demils of theurban landscape issue from the skilled hands ofarchitects and planners on the team. Drawingsformed at this stage of the process serve not onlyto document the environment but also to create a

rry sil-

WLr.Fil={:iq--

t_Frrru

ffiffimlMil

At this stage of the R/UDAT visit verbal and

statistical descriptions of the problem have

become infused with graphic and photographicimagery. Subsequent meetings with special interestgroups, interested citizens and individuals create

an understanding of priority of issues which is thefinal step before the generation of new ideas. [t isusually at this point, sometime between thesecond and third day, that conceptual solutionsbegin to emerge from the team. Executed withsimplicity of form and line, diagrams of orderingprinciples begin to appear in notebooks and onlarge paper sheets hung from walls.

Many of the popular conceptual solutions of theR/UDAT process seem to owe their form and

structure to recurring themes in the literature ofurban design. Linear organizing concepts - malls,

boardwalks, riverfront greenways, arcades, and so

on - apparently strike the imagination ofdesigners with greater intensity than other formal

ordering systems. For example, in a city possessing

an undifferentiated grid, the tendency is to favor

those solutions which seek to emphasize linearsegments over those which treat the grid as an

entire structural system. A similar tendency to

favor concentrated cores can be found in theconceptual diagrams of a R/UDAI Gam. The

I il I.EJ

sheer physical dominance of the downtown area

has a habit of overriding the importance ofsuburban cores, even if economic evidencedemonstrates that downtown plays a subordinaterole. It could be argued that a sort of professional

bias operates in favor of the downtown, but it is

also possible that, as a concentrated phenomenon,

it is easier to conceptualize and to reproduce ingraphic terrns this tightly-knit accretionof built space.

Linear form connotes growth, expansion,adaptability. it suggests linkage and continuity -characteristics which are deemed desirable incontemporary cities. The core implies density andmultiple use, which in tum suggest high levels ofhuman interaction. In their simplest form, lines

and cores can be organized into graphic constructsof just about any conceivable type of urbanstructural system. Therefore, a city with a strong

central core and one or more linear organizing

systems possesses a higher level of imageabilitythan, say, either a suburban region or a typicalsmall town with a dispersed population.

,30 If linear and focal organization forms a majorsource of conceptual statemenrs in the R/UDAIprocess, what kinds of drawings are mostfrequently utilized to communicate ideas to thepublic? Aerial drawings - plans and perspective

- are probably printed most often in the officialreports. Aerial relief plans, also known as shadowplans, allow the designer to give a sense of mass

and therefore density to large sections of a citywith comparatively few lines. These types ofdrawings also permit the form of buildings to beoutlined, even if the plan arrangements are notknown. In addition, landscape details can be

executed as masses of foliage or planes of uniformtexture. Aerial perspectives are extremely useful fordescribing the physiography of regions or large

cities, and for visualizing the sculptural qualities ofdowntown cores and other urban concentrations.Both types of aerial drawings are used to describecomplex urban environments in broad, structuralterrns in onCer that the whole city is perceivable,or so that some large part of a city can becomprehended.

R/UDAT Team members are especially adroit atdistilling the unique visual attributes of cities intoa language of design through rapid sketchingtechniques. These take the form of either ground-

level views, usually made during the traditionaltour of the site, or conceptual diagrams. Excutedwith a drawing pen in five minutes or less, ground

level drawings reduce vistas, buildings, or buildingdetails down to their essential formalcharacteristics with only a minimum amount ofdetail. Conceptual diagrams are usually anabstraction, in plan form, of some aspect of thecity which will later become a structuring device

for recommendations. For example, the left-overspaces in a city block might be organized into apedestrian-oriented park system through a

diagrammatic interpretarion of built space andopen space. Similarly, the ragged edge of an urbangrid system as it makes contact with a meanderingriver might become a visual pattem for riverfronthousing. The reductionist element of thesedrawings feeds the creative component of theR/UDAT process while simultaneouslycommunicating imageable ideas amongteam members.

Finally, some mention of the process diagramshould be made. It is a sort of complex flowdiagram - perhaps lacking the rigor of analgorithm, but conveying a similar sense ofsequential decision-making - in which a series ofactions are mapped out. Utilized most often inconjunction with implementation strategies, theprocess diagram is the urban designer's equivalentof written instructions. Process diagrams can befound in many R/UDAT reports - leading a

community through various stages of acomprehensive p[an, or outlining a plan to rebuildthe dourntowrr area.

As stated previously, the generation andcommunication of ideas is subject to highlyvariable factors: The composition of the team andthe skills it brings to bear upon the problem, thenature and imageability of the problem itsel( andthe manner in which information is obtained. Thefollowing section will examine these issues ingreater detail.

132 Critical Dimensionsof the

Creative Process

Nothing is more important to the success of aRJUDAT mission than the composition of theteam. Quite apaft from social compatibility and

mutual respect, team members must possess theability to gmsp the essence of a problem - oftenon the basis of fragmented and incompleteinformation - and to understand the differences

in point of view between themselves and theircolleagues. This latter quality requires breadth ofknowledge in many fields, and the composition ofthe team typically reflects the complo<ity ofproblems studied: Building design, landscape

design, transportation planning, urban landeconomics, proj ect financing and development,urban administration, land use control systems,

urban sociology, and other diciplines.'l7hatevettheir background may be, a[ team members have aspecial interest in urban issues, and their trainingprobably includes a(posure to, and experience inthe resolution of problems drawing on knowledge

from this diverse array of disciplines. The architectas urban designer has, for example, most likelyreceived some sort of formal training at theintroductory level in all of these disciplines, and itis equally likely that information originating inthese disciplines is brought to bear on his or herproblem-solving activi ties in professional practice.

Understanding all of the fields of study involved inthe R/UDAT problem to be investigated, andpossessing depth and creative skills in at least onesuch field is the prerequisite for membershipon the team. This precludes the narrowspecialist as team member because it is unlikelythat such a person could respond to the intuitiveprocesses at work in the concentnted, charrette-type atmosphere of a R/UDAI mission. zuUDATteams therefore tend to be a grcup of creativegeneralists, each member having a rather specialskill to contribute to the prcblem-solving process.

Where are such persons to be found, and how is a

team assembledl Over the years a pool of talenthas been organized by the American Institute ofArchitects' R/UDAI Administration. It itspublished material the AIA has identified 572

team members from 23 professions during thefint nineteen years of operation of theR/UDAI program:

203 Architect/Urban Designers90 Planners65 Economists35 Tiansportation Consultants35 Landscape Architects33 Attomeys75 Sociologists15 Developers13 Ecologist/Environmentalists10 Historic Preservationists8 PublicAdministrators7 Political Scientists6 Downtown Executives2 Artists3 Humanists4 Joumalists2 Mayon?. Port Specialists6 Energy Consultant1 Facilities Manager2 Geologist1 Land Owner2 State Representative

In addition, 65 Schools of Architecrure provided360 students as resource personnel for 89 R/UDATprojects. Gams are assembled on the basis ofexposure to and performance of professionals fromprevious projects, from contact with collegueswithin the AIA and its Urban Design andPlanning Committee, from professional practise,and on the basis of recommendations.

Finding the correct mixture of expertise, creativeskill, and compatibiliry is no mean feat, and it isnot surprising that a small group of veteranR/UDAT team members continually reappear inthe credits of project repofts. Akin to an eliteguard, these person usually possess outstandingskills and creative talents. It is possible to thumbthrough some official RJUDAI reports andidentifu the work of specific urban designerswithout glancing at the team roster. This is

especially true where illustrations are involved,because each drawing carties thegraphic "signaturd' of its delineator. These persons

are responsible, somewhat unwittingly, for settingthe standanls of excellence in design andcommunications skills by which others measure

their success. Consequently, each new R/UDATmission has a documented inheritance of urbandesign projects whose collective effect is tosuccessively raise the effort and output. In thisregard, the author noted a steady improvement inthe quality of RJUDAI projects - as judged by thereports - over time, an observation based on bothquality of graphic and written material, and upondepth of investigation. Some R/UDAT projects,such as Birmingham, Alabama (1976) and lrynn,Massachusetts (1982) generated such a prodigiousvolume of material that it is hard to see how thework could be accomplished in the time available.Both of these projects are summarized in theaccompanying case studies.

134 All of the attributes of a successful team member

apply to its leader, the Chairman. This person

must be resourceful in managing people, especially

under the stressful conditions of a high-pressure

R/UDAT mission, and be compassionate to theirneeds and those of the community. While the

Chairman is just as capable of formulating creative

solutions to problems as any team member, it is

necessary to play down this attribute in order to

maximize the contributions of others.

Consequently, the Chairman encourages,

suppofts, sympathizes and even exhorts, but rarely

become involved in committing conceptualstatements to paper.

Another critical dimension of the problem-solving

process is the imageability of the problem under

investigation. Just as the words "linear"and'tore" are able to evoke images of form, so do

the words and phrases "downtown', "historicpreservation', and "waterfront" have the power to

evoke the physical environments of cities. Theassociative aspects of words can shape attitudes,

both positive and negative, among urban designers

and consequently predispose team members

towanls the acceptance or rejection of concepts.

The phrases'tommercial striy''and "suburban development" have never enjoyed a

favorable position in the literature of urban design,

and one is harcl pressed to find these very serious

urban development problems utilized as thematic

material for a R/UDAI mission. It is not so much

a matter of rejection of fact as of imagery.

Both of these phases generate images of confused

or unrelated forms, or perhaps lack of visible

structure, a characteristic which makes the urban

designer uneasy. Those words and phrases whichpossess a highly structured content, or suggest

concentration of buildings - such as "riverfrontdevelopment" or "downtown" give the designer an

immediate mental construct upon which to build a

formal design statement. Although it is difficult toprove, it seems that the imageability of problem

has the capacity to provide intuitive access to a

means for resolution, and that this intuitiveaccessibility is somehow shaped by professional

attitudes towards key words and phrases.

The manner in which information is obtained by

team members is also important in the creative

process. The team is usually provided with a

package of information prior to a site visit.Contextual information, which is so important to

the comprehensive design and planning process of

the R/UDAf methodology, cannot easily be

provided through words and drawings.

Consequentty, a great deal of useful information is

obtained through an actual inspection of the site.

During this time period team members may make

sketches, take photographs, or simply commit tomemory a set of visual imPressions.

Physical contact with the site enables team

members to develop design criteria for futureproposals. It is during this period that valuejudgements conceming the appropriateness ofform, detail, texture, color, density and otherenvironmental variables are made. Naturally, each

team member is making the assessment

independently of his colleagues, and some sort ofopen discussion or presentation is needed todiscover those ideas which reinforce each other, or

those which are in conflict. This occurs in theR/UDAT meeting place or workplace. The teampins up sketches, Iooks at slides, make comments

about maps and generally exposes its collectiveintelligence to general scrutiny. Half-a-dozen or

more environmentally perceptive people are able

to amass a great deal of useful information throughsuch an informal data gathering process. Moreimportant, open discussion serves as a kind of filterin which idiosyncracy is separated from

constituent knowledge.

Organizing and assessing information in thisfashion is characteristic of the R/UDAT problem-

solving process. It is probably the most effective

way to interpret the issues of complex

environments in a short period. Pattems ofrecognition and the recurrence of physical

attributes takes precedence over the abstractidentity of numbers. Visual information is imbued

with meaning and is translatable into actionwithout the necessity for rigorous analytic tools.

t:iHln'tII":.;-"-mI

Case Studies

Many of the issues raised in Part I and in thepreceeding section of this introduction can be

found in the following pages. Seven case studies

have been chosen as exemplifying the best of theR/UDAf problem-solving process. Criteria util ized

to select those case studies were as follows:

.To show that the scope of RJUDAT activitiesextends ftom small towns to Metropolitan regions;

oTo cover major recurring issues - downtownredevelopment, historic preservation, urbanexpansion, neighborhood revitalization, regionaldevelopment, highway corridor design, specialresource utilization and preservation, recreationplanning, urban space design and planning, and

urban facilities planning;rTo convey the sense of drama which manyR/UDAT teams experienced; and

rTo reveal the essence of creative ideas throughthe writings and drawings of team members.

Each of the case studies presented in Part II isexcerpted from published team repoft. A briefoverview of the significant aspects of each projectpreceeds the selected text and drawings.

The reader will notice a prcfirsion of writing styles

and variations in the usage of language. Editinghas been limited to the corection of obvious

inaccuracies of both fact and language in order topreserve the spontaneity of the original reports.

Case StudiesDenver, ColoradoWilson, North CarolinaLynn, MassachusetfsSeattle, WashingtonBirmingham, AlabamaH ea lds b u rg, Ca lifo rn iaOlympia, Washington

140 Urban Design lmpactof Broad Transit

System ProposalsFebruary 1976

Danver, Colorado

In 1974 something of a miracle occurred in theMetropolitan Denver area: The citizens approved

the formation of a "Regional TiansportationDistrict" to develop a transpoftation planinvolving seven counties and thirty-sevenjurisdictions, and supported it with ample taxallocations! It was a dynamic act, and widespread

approval showed that it had touched the hot nerveof citizen concem.

After two years of operation, however, doubtsabout the concept began to surface, particularlyamong those most concemed with downtownDenver. At this point R/UDAT was called in tostudy the situation on account of its widelyrecognized interdisciplinary approach to problem-

solving. It was one of the most complex R/UDATundertakings to date because it involved issues ofland use, growth management, and settlementpattems. In addition, economic issues of value

capture of transpoftation modes and adequacy offare-box receipts had to be considered. Finally,altemative strategies had to be examined as

interim measures in planning thetransportation system.

The basic purpose of the Denver R/UDAT studywas to evaluate the urban design and planningimplications of a proposed rail and rapid transitcorridor as part of a larger rail and bustranspoftation system for the Denver metropolitanregion. The RJUDAI team, a grcup of experiencedarchitects and planners, very quickly grasped thebroader issues surrounding their mission andexpanded their problem-solving role to includepolicies for urban growth, design concepts for thedowntown area, planning for the Platte RiverValley, ne ighborhood redevelopment strategies,and other concems.

The going was hot and heavy. Preconceptions ofopportunities and problem solutions lay in everyquafter of the communities to be served. TheR/UDAT team appeared to be exceeding its chargein considering regional growth policies rather thattranspoftation systems. Regional TiansportationDistrict officials were naturally nervous, and evendefensive. Politicians were sharply divided aboutwhat was going on; the mayor never put in anappearance, while, on the other hand, onecouncilman never left the workshop during theR/UDAT session. Meetings were attended by everysegment of the community, and every person spokepassionately.

Denver, Colorado

,42 The team consisted of five urban designers, each

with a different area of concem and specific

talent, as well as a transpoftation expert, a

transportation economist, and an attomey whospecialized in land use. Along the way there were

sharp lines of disagreement among these

thoughtful people, but as the event took place,

differences were resolved and disparate proposals

were pulled together into a coherent and

harmonious whole.

The recommendations covered a large territoryand included nearly every activity that wouldeffect the future of the region. Therecommendations dealt with growth policies, such

as growth without expansion. Th.y dealt withland use and land values. Th.y were concemedwith downtown and the development of theraihoad yards and water fronts. Th.y identified theneed for neighborhood to exercise a leadership rolein the determination of their future.

The Denver R/UDAI was many years ago. What'shappened since thenl Many of its proposals have

been incorporated into the Greater Denverpolitical processes, and the leadership structure intown still values the effort. Some of the issues have

been resolved and some are still being debated.The significance of the Denver R/UDAf lies in ademonstration of the interdependence of all theelements of urban design and in the value of theinterdisciplinary approach in seeking resolution ofdiverse issues.

Denver R/UDAT Study. February 6-9, L976,Denveq Colorado. Team members: Jules GregoryFAIA, Chairman; Jonathan Bamett, AIA/AIP;Charles Blessing, FAIA/AIP; Gary Fauth; Peter

Hasselman, AIA; David I-ewis, ARIBA/AIA/AIP;Summer Myers; RicharC N. Gter.

"a<3>'*/

't. t,./ ,

Framework forDevelopment

Congestion

This group has been called to Denver for thepurpose, among other things, of evaluating RTD's(Reg ional Tiansportat ion D istrict) rap id trans itproposal. Two related conclusions emerge withregard to this proposal:

The proposal as it stands cannot be justified interrns of transpoftation service alone. Howeveqtherapid transit proposal might be economicallyjustified in land development tenns, depending onthe results of data yet to be assembled.

The rapid rail proposal cannot be justified intransportation terms alone because it does noteffectively address the following set oftranspoft ation-related problems :

Many Denver residents may perceive thecongestion of their highways as a problem.Compared with the situation in other cities ofsimilar size, however, it is a relatively minor one. Ifanything, Denver highways appear to be largelyunderutilized even during the rush hours. But evenif the opposite were the case, it is highly doubrfulthat transit could relieve Denver's highwaycongestion any more effectively than it has

anyplace else.

Despite the empirical evidence of congested cities,planners theorized that building a new, superiortransit system would relieve congestion by

diverting motorists. If you open up a new subway

and people who used to drive now take the subway,

how can there not be fewer cars on the road thanformerlyl lndeed, there will be fewer cars on day

one and on day two; but after a while more cars

seem to show up on the roads to fill the "empty"spaces left by those who have shifted to transit. [thappened most recently in Mexico City. Vhenthe subway opened there was a noticeablereduction in downtown traffic for about threeweeks. Shonly thereafter the city reverted to its"steady-statd' of traffic congestion. The same

thing will probably happen to BART in SanFrancisco and Metro in Washington, D.C. It wouldcost half a billion dollars to find out if it wouldalso happen in Denver.

Denver, Colorado

t4 fullution The rail rapid transit system would reduce airpollution to the extent that it would divertmotorists from the highways. Under the most

optimistic assumptions, only a small fraction ofmotorists would be attracted from their cars to thesystem with a miniscule impact on pollution.

Energy Again, the small shift from automobile to transitwould affect the energy situation in such a minorway as to be virtually impossible to measure.

Ridership The ridership projected for the rapid transit system

for the year 2000 is too small and too uncertain tojustify the large expenditures called for by thesystem. The RTD figures indicate a ridership ofapproximately 9,000 persons per peak hour.

Presumably, some of these would come from theNorth and others from the South, thus splittingthe already small number of passengers among twolines. The numbers are so small and theuncertainties so great that the ridership may notmaterialize at all even in those small magnitudes.but even if ridership does materialize as projectedit simply cannot justifr a half billion dollarexpenditure. Assuming that the peak load couldbe handled by less expensive bus, the "need" forrail system is presumably generated by the peak

hour riders. Thus the capital cost per peak hourrider comes to over $50,000.00.

\r'. i':---.t - . -.

While the rapid rail system cannot be justified intransportation terms alone for the reasons notedabove, it might be justified in terms of aneconomic investment. Denver - like other largecities in the U.S. - has been under increasingpressure to improve the quality of urban life from arelatively diminishing economic base. If thatimprovement is to continue, the economic basewhich suppofts it must be expanded andstrengthened. The proposed RTD light rail systemmight contribute to that end. But in oder to do so

the system must be treated as a public investmentintended to generate an economic rateof retum of 7 -l0o/o.

Regional Land Use Planln L974 the Denver Regional Council ofGovemments published a regional land use planwith the approval of its 37 member jurisdictions,based on a projected regional growth of 1,000,000to a total of 2,350,000 by the year 2000.

Based on this land use plan, as revised and updatedin January 1976, R/UDAT assumes the followingbroad designations:

Suburban growth in the north 400,000Suburban growth in the southeast 300,000Growth in transpoftation corridors

and'hctivity centers 250,000Growth in oristing city neighborhoods 50,000

1,000,000

Critical Dangers of GrowthThe previous designations are misleading anddangerous if they are accepted within a climate oflaissez faire suburban development and expansionoutwards into open countryside.

o The metropolitan region has a tradition of "leapfrog" suburban developments; i.e., suburbandevelopers, moving ever outwanCs, will select andbuild new pocket communities only on the mostfavorable rural sites, leaving bands of less favorableland underdeveloped.

. One consequence is that much of the suburbansettlement pattem of metropolitan Denver is a

series of residential islands surrounded by bands ofwasteland useless for agriculture and unrealized as

a recreational resource.oAnother consequence is the creation of small,

separate and introverted communities. Quiteclearly these communities, despite the advantagesof rural settings, are deficient in services andcommunity facilities such as libraries, schools andhealth care.

oBut the most serious consequences are economic.lowdensity pockets of population in themetropolitan region mean uneconomic andwasteful lengths of roads, utilities, water and sewer

lines. And for the residents there are longcommuting joumeys by automobile to work,schools, shops and entertainment.

Urban DesignCriteria

Denver, Colorado

rThe impact of the "leap frog" tradition ofsuburban expansion is particularly harmful to theregion's fragile ecology. The bands of wasteland are

denuded and eroded. Fauna and flora have been

destroyed. Underground streams have beenpolluted. And pollution also hangs heavy

in the air.oMost often, outward-moving population is middle

and higher income. The result is a multiplepattem of "ghetto-izationl' The small suburban

communities are introvefted and homogeneous.

And many inner-city neighborhoods are

abandoned to minorities.oAnd the further outward suburban communities

radiate, the more isolated Denver's central business

district becomes.

The R/UDAI team endorses

two basic strategies

to deal with growth:

1. Growth without expansion.

2. Development of sub-centers ort'activity centersi'

Essentially these strategies are components withina single and overall land use policy for themetropolitan region.

Basic Urban DesignConcepts To Deal

With Growth

Grcwth without expansionis a strategy of infill. Its benefits are numerous.

.lt directs new development to wasteland areas.o It puts to economic use the public investment in

roads, utilities, sewers and water sysrtems.o It expands existing small settlements, enabling

them to afford the community amenities in whichthey are presently deficient.

o It resists further encroachment on the naturalresources of the region by metropolitan expansion.

The development of sub-centers or "activitycenters"also has a number of benefits.

c It encourages the development of sub-centers at

strategic locations in the region at whichcommunity facilities (shops, schools, arts centers,health care, etc.) may be concentrated.

o Since several communities may share an 'hctivitycenter" the strategy encourages

inter-community relat ionships.I Convenient tocations for "activity centers" will

cut commuting distances.r A network of 'hctivity centers" throughout the

metropolitan region will permit the balancedgrowth of the central business district.

Some Key Examplesof the

Growth Policy

Central Business DistrictDenver's central business district is, at present, a

high density commercial island in a sea ofparking lots.

It is a commuter center, full of people and activityby day, empty and dead at night and weekends.

lts impact on adjacent areas is extremely harmful.Commuter traffic lacerates contiguousneighborhoods, such as Capitol Hill and cherryHills, contributing to their decline.

R/IJDAI necommends that the centml businessdistrict should be reinforced with nerrresidential usaga

This residential usage should be treated as

extensions from the surrounding residentialneighborhoods into the central business district.

This strategy will enable the unique scale andsocial characteristics of each neighborhood(Capitol Hill, Highlands, Auraria Colleges,Burlington, etc.) to reach into the central businessdistrict, thus ensuring continuity of scale andamenity, paft icularly for pedestrians.

--a'Ja-/-#a

-//..i-

_\\ ==_r_\a\\

:'*F\X*

.5 ,D .g

"" -*.--

R/tIDAf, also recommends that the centralbusiness district should be carefully expanded inscale, materials and landscaping to interrelatewith the historic buildings and environment ofCentral Denver, particularly Larimer Square,Union Station, the warehouse district and othernotable buildings.

R/UDAT regards this recommendation as

particularly important. The culture of a great cityhas its roots in its past; the vitality of a great cityis in its vision of its past; the vitality of a great cityhas its roots and its past; the vitality of a great cityis in its vision of its future.

Denver's central business district, like the centralbusiness districts of several other major cities, isconcentrated, and within easy pedestrian reach ofall points. Very little accommodation is presently

made for the pedestrian.

R/UDAf, recommends immediate action tohumanize the central business district,particularly fot people on foot.

R/UDAI notes with enthusiasm that the Mayor's

Central Planning Committee and DowntownDenver Inc. are preparing recommendations forachieving this goal within the area bounded by

Larimer, 14th, Broadway, Colfax and 18th.

Recommendations include graphics, lighting,

signalization, seating, landscaping and

information.

R/UDAf also notes that during the Christmasseason, a poftion of 16th was closed to traffic, withapparent considerable success.

R/UDAI necommends tempomry and permanentmalls, wall murals and sculptures, and othermeans of diversifying and enlivening the centerof this great metrcpolitan area.

R/UDAI further recommends that majorcultural resources such as the art gallery, the cityauditorium, etc. should be linked by speciallandscaped rcutes.

BurlingtonThe official description of Burlington is "a newcity within the city." The concept is not new. Thisdesignation has been given to Cedar.Riverside inMinneapolis and Park Forest South in Chicago,among others.

The description is misleading. Cedar-Riverside is

not a new city within the city; it is a new graft intothe parent stock of the old and existing city.

Burlington is likewise surrounded by Denver. Onall sides are unique and vital parts of the city. Ifthe developers of Burlington will look carefully atthe example of Cedar-Riverside they will realizethat to overlook the interests and goals ofneighboring communities is perilous.

R/UDAI necommends that the city shouldimmediately develop an urban design strategy forthe development of Burlington.

Basic to the strategy, the City of Denver shouldregard itself as a development partner with thedeveloper. The city should further actively involveeach of the surrounding communities, andrepresentatives of central business district interests,in Burlingtort's development process.

tVe illustrate here an urban design process

for Burlington.

Rather than develop a master plan for the entiredevelopment, frozen in architectural forms whicheveryone involved must know cannot be bindingon the developer over a l5-year time frame forimplementation, R/UDAT recommends the jointdevelopment of an overall srategy for growth, witha detailed first phase development plan, on thebasis of which subsequent phases will be catalyzed.

In this way the project may be allowed to grow andchange in response to prevailing conditions, yet inaccord with an agreed growth strategy.

Denver, Colorado

- --t--r--r+-,I;X- -,-1*^.)..-p,=a*. 1_' i'.**-TT

?-r'-<<<-1'-

C o nc e ntrated Develo pm e nt C o rrido rsOne of the major open space networks in themetropolitan region is its highway corridors. TheRTD rapid transit alignment follows the I-25highway corridor for a considerable poftion of its23-mile length.

R/UDAT recommends, as described in earlierpages of this report, concentrated developmentsand activity centers along such corridors,pafticularly the RTD alignment.

However these developments should not be

reganded as new and separate inserts into the Citybut should be viewed as extensions of the existingcommunities on each side of the corridor.

In this way the new developments can be plannedwith community pafticipation in the developmentof guidelines and designs, and can be responsive tothe scale of the community itself.

-r ;i _-

Platte River ValleyNext to the mountains, Denver's most importantnatural resource is the Platte River Valley.

If the greatness of cities is measured by theirappreciation of their rivers, Denver would possibly

rank among the lowest in the world. As outsiders,the R/UDAI team finds no excuse for the City'sappalling treatment of its river.

R/UDAT, therefore, enthusiastically applauds theefforts of a small grcup of young planners in theCity's Planning Office to establish the Platte RiverValley and Cherry Creek as linear recreationamenities.

It is of utmost importance to Denver that thePlatte River Vallery should become a recrcationresource for a full range of age grcups, ethnicchanacteristics and interests of its citizens.

R/UDAT recommends that the Planning Officeshould work in partnership with the citizens,particularly with the representatives of thecommunities contiguous to the river, to developappropriate zones of usage, and the appropriateactivities within such zones.

For example:rConservation and picnic areas, shaded areas for

quiet walks beside the river, seating areas forthe elderly.

oFormal recreation areas, tennis, bocci, etc.oBikeways.

rBoating and possibly fishing ponds.o Natural wildlife areas.

An intricate radial greenway system of walkwaysand bikeways should be designed to penetrate thecommunities on each side, thus linking themaximum number of people to their river.

In the central business district areas the rivershould be accorded the formal and ceremonialtreatment that urban rivers tradiationally enjoy ingreat cities. There should be seating steps, formaltree planting, fountains and sculptures.

*a,::-y>---,-

Denver, Colorado

Wilson, North Carolina

-----/

<r\'\. oD \-:""-3*

ffi*e/

The Wilson R/UDAT study was conducted withthe same broad focus attitude that typified theDenver study. Denver, however, had apopulation between one and two millionat the time of the study, while WilsoCspopulation was approximately 30,000. In additionto the contrast provided by a large metropolitanregion and a small southem town, there was

another essential difference in these two RJUDAIstudies: The mission at Denver started with aspecific focus and broadened over time, while themission at Wilson.began with a broad objectiveand narrowed during the five-day visit.

No single city dominates the settlement pattem ofNorth Carolina, although the state does possess

three rapidly urbanizing regions known as

Metrolina, the Tiiad, and the Research Tiiangle.North Carolina is essentially a state of small townsand possesses a way of life that typifies thesoutheastem region of the nation.\Tilson lies fifty miles to the east of Raleigh,capitol of the state of North Carolina and eastemapex of the Research Tiiangle. Situated in thefertile coastal plain, Wilson is both anagricultural center and a major manufacturingcenter - the former on the decline, and the latteron the increase.

lt is a beautiful town. An arcade of immense elmtrees lines a major entrance to the city. There are

many stately mansions and houses along its streets.In the center of the towrr a nineteenth centurycoufthouse offers a Corinthian arcade to a mainstreet and provides a plaza for shoppers andpedestrians. Shade trees line most streets andprovide relief from the oppressive heat of thesummer. Members of the R/UDAT team, drawnfrom all over the nation, probably felt that theyhad come to the quintessential Southemcommunity: Easy going, perhaps frayed at theedges but nevertheless charmingly time-wom,genteel, and rural in its attitudes.

Social Change in aSmall Southern

TownMay 1974

This picture of tranquiliry was shattered by twoevents: A bus tour of the city, and presentations tothe team by minority groups. During the bus tourmembers of the team were taken to parts of thecity close to the downtown area where they saw

substandarrd housing in predominantly Black, low-income areas. Propped up on concrete blocks,crude detached frame houses created an impressionof pervasive deterioration. This impression was

further reinforced by streets lacking curbs, gutters,and in some cases asphalt paving. AfterwarrCs, inclosed sessions, minority leaders sketched a pictureof povefty, alienation from political processes, anda subtle but insidious segregation in urban life.

Wilson, Nor-th Carolina

The bus tour also included suburban residentialareas, commercial strips and industrial areas. Gammembers observed that technology and industrialexpansion were changing the small town way oflife. Northem industries, attracted by non-unionized and low-wage labor as well as by low realestate taxes, were bringing a new lifestyle to\i(/ilson. It became evident that the picture ofcommunity cohesion presented by local officialswas sharply at variance with the experience of theR/UDAT team.

Wilson represents a type of community that can

be found in many parts of the country. Intemaland extemal change are bringing about stresses inthe urban fabric and major upheavals in the socialstructure of the town. The design and planningissues of \Tilson are comprehensive in nature andcall for the collective vision and skills of theR/UDAT process. The charge to the team reflected

this comprehensiveness: To suggest outlines for a

plan which addresses itself to the needs of allsegments of the community and all sections of thecity; to identify design potentials and suggest a

means of bringing them about; to suggest a "planfor planning" the city; to show how planning anddesign guidelines can improve the managementcapabilities of local units of govemments; and tosuggest appropriate public policy andimplementation methods.

The Wilson R/UDAf study is a fine example ofthe ability of a team to organize disparateinformation into a whole picture, to identifusensitive issues and deal with them in an impartialmanner, and to utilize graphic skills as the basis forsolutions to problems. Tobacco bams andwarehouses provided inspiration for re.use studies,and sketches of substandard housing became thebasis for an urban network of interrelated servicesand facilities.

One of the major dififerences between the Denverand rU7ilson study is the function of scale ofcommunity. Design sketches for activity centercalong the rapid transit system are generalized andprototypical in nature in the Denver study. On theother hand, suggestions for the rehabilitation of atobacco warehouse and downtown redevelopmentare highly specific in the r07ilson study. The reasonis that team members were able to explore \filsonin a close-up, intimate way and to comprehend thetotal urban environment in greater detailthan in Denver.

Wilson was chosen as an example of the R/UDATprocess because it clearly demonstrates theversatility of the interdisciplinary team to respondto differences in size of city and range of issue.

Reprinted from the July/August 1974 issue of theNorth Carolina Architect, the following excerptoutlines the general recommendations of theR/UDAT team.

?es*ond 2<

llTEitct unnlt*nrl ilflAr

\flilson R/UDAT Study. May 2-6,1974 Wilson,North Carolina. Team members: Ronald A.Straka, AIA, Chairman: Alistair M. Black,AIA/AIP; Charles Blessing, FAIA/AIP; JohnDesmond, FAIA; Carl H. Marshall and Harry \W.

Atkinson; Richard L. Rosen, AIA/AIP; RichardN. Gger; and William L. Yancey.

Published in the North Carolina Architect, Vol.21, nos. 7 and 8, July/August 1974, pp. 7-34. Gxtand photographs are by the author, Peter

Batcheloq AIA/AIP. Drawings are from theoriginal R/UDAT team report.

158 Recommendationsof the RUDAT Team

Definition of the Planning AreaAny planning exetcise must begin with a search

for appropriate boundaries for the study. There are

'butside" influences upon any area no matter whatboundaries are selected. "Everything is connectedto everything else]' we are told by John Gardner.

Thus, the selection of limits must be made

carefully since important influences may be

neglected.

The city of Wilson feels influences from outside its

borders, and is involved with all other levels ofgovemment activity. Reconnaissance showed thatthere are unusual interconnections between thecity of \Tilson and \0Uilson County. \Tilson has a

number of problems which extend beyond the citylimits, reaching out into county territory.Similarly, there are opportunities which couldgreatly benefit both city and county but whichcannot be grasped without carefullycoordinated action.

Therefore, the borders of \Uilson County were

delineated as the planning study area. Thesharpest focus of the recommendations is upon thecity of Wilson, but, in recognition of the networkof interests and influences between county and

city, the county-city combination is recognized as a

valuable definition of the planning area.

-1.,_ ,-1..,.'1-- h

ci*S\\-\-"^

UIITI D

General Recom mendation sThe first recommendation is that the city andcounty give serious consideration to creating a

combined planning program. Such a programwould translate their good relationship intomaximum benefit for all their citizens.

The one-mile extraterritorial limit beyond the cityboundaries is not sufficient to effectively controlthe location, rate, and type of growth, while theeconomic differential between development in thecity (with full services) and in the rural areas (withlower land prices and no services) is too great.

Since taxation has been effectively equalizedthroughout the county, including the city oflUilson, it is now practical to effect such strongcooperation between county and city agenciesthat developers will not be averse to locatingwhere services can be efficiently brought to theirdevelopments. The result will be greater access forthe residents in planned neighborhoods ro theservices and amenities that they require.Agricultural land may also be preserved more easily.

The basic information required for a joint plan is

already at hand, in the many fine planning reportswhich have been produced for the city and thecounty. All that is required to draw from these isan action plan, embodying such elements of theR/UDAf study as may be judged useful, withwhatever additional provisions the joint plannersmay develop. Under this plan, \Tilson can proceedwith safe, orderly, rewarding growth.

Prcventing Leapfrog DevelopmentIn maintaining a high quality of life in theoutlying areas without wasteful expenditures offunds, it is imperative that development be

concentrated where it can best be served.

I-eapfrogging must be minimized, and if areas are

bypassed, they must be brought under appropriateplanning and controls. An urban services area

should be designated and recognized by all.

In the planned extension of industrialdevelopment, for example, each aspect of capitalexpenditure should be considered a developmentalfeature. Streets, water, electrical, gas or sewer lineextensions should be scheduled to meet

development goals. In tum, officials or privatedevelopers should coordinate their efforts so thatall services may be extended simultaneously andno single agency would act to impose unexpectedexpenditures on other agencies.

Efficient Provision of SeruicesAt the same time, the costs of public services to

suppoft industrial development should be

distributed so as to minimize high taxes on those

who already enjoy public services in order toprovide the services to those who do

not have them.

Such broad coordination among public agencies

and private developers will call for coordinated

planning by city and county officials and forsystems of processing and review to assure fullknowledge of industrial development programs.

Joint city-county planning board operation and

common development directives could provide

adequate reviews.

Minimizing l-95 lmpact on City GrowthSimilar planning can minimize the impact of l-95construction which bypasses \UTilson and is

expected to generate suburban \Uilsondevelopment. Deliberate approval of staged

development would provide desired facilities. Atthe same time the planned reservation of certainareas or the refusal to provide public services can

serve to protect areas against undesirabledevelopment. Such reservation could protectwatersheds, open spaces, desired park land, and

farm land. Planned development should assure

economical utilization of resources and minimizeproperty tiD(es and capital expenditures.

Most important, unplanned I-95 development

could be expected to cause transfer orabandonment of highway-oriented trade or serviceactivities from US301 and the consequent decay

of the eastem side of Wilson. Planned support ofthe industrial activities of the 301 corridor,

maintenance of the thoroughfare as a major butlocal service commercial area, and redevelopmentor extension of residential sectors near 301 wouldmaintain the economic well-being of the corridor.

furtormance ZoningThe new Wilson has available several importanttools which can help it in its effort to directgrowth. The most basic of these is the adoption ofa zoning ordinance, applying equally in city and

county. The regulations presently in force in thecity of Wilson could simply be extended to includethe entire county. However, region-wide zoningshould add a series of provisions not presently inthe city ordinance. These additions are titled"Perfiormance" Zoning in some areas and "lmpact"Zoning in others.

Performance zoning is based on the concept of"carrying capacity" - that is, since one piece ofland may be capable of supporting more intensivedevelopment than another, the land itself provides

a guide to development. Similarly, utilities are

constantly being constructed, but those areas

which are without such services cannot all receive

them at once. To proceed one more step, while alldevelopment results in an increase in the taxdigest, some developments cost more in services

than they retum in taxes. Just as there is an upperlimit for the development which the land can

support, there is an upper limit which the utilitiesand public services can suppoft, and there is a

limit to the amount of tax deficit a developmentmay cause. Thken together, these limits form thecarrying capacity.

162 Since there are factors which vary from one area toanother, or sometimes from one building lot toanother, the carrying capacity varies in the same

way. This capacity, however, results from elements

which can be measured, or which have already

been measured, so that the carrying capacity can

be established as a matter of public record. UnderPerformance Zoning, a developer must

demonstrate that his proposal remains'within theestablished carrying capacity before he can

gain approval.

In this way, \UUi[son can prevent overloading of itsnatural environment, its municipal services, or itseconomic resources since all of these must be

respected by new development. The amount ofgrowth, its location and its scheduling are allmatters of public concem. Under Performance

Taning, they are under public control.

fupulation MovementCensus records show that rtrUilson County and fourof its adjacent counties in the region lostpopulation over the 1960's, yet these net changes

do not accurately reflect the migration or transfer

of residents nor the very real growth of Wilson.Tiue, some residents, particularly young schoolgraduates, left to take jobs in other areas pointingup the present shortage of employmentopportunities. However, the ourflow of residents is

partly balanced by an inflow of new ones whichhas resulted in continuing need for new housingand greater requirements for public services andexpanding markets.

Actually, the City of Wilson registered a netpopulation increase of about 600 persons over the1960's and population has continued to increase

over the last four years as more of the once-ruralresidents as well as newcomers move into theurban area. \Tithin the city alone more than 2,100

new housing units were added in the 1960's, andbuilding permits indicate new housing has been

coming on the market since 1970 at the rate ofmore than 300 units each year.

Coupled with these housing gains in the city, atleast 1,400 units have been lost since 1960 -about 100 per year. These losses, resulting fromconversions to other uses as well as fromdemolitions, point up further the intemal transfer

of residents of lVilson and the continuing need forreplacement housing for even the present residents.

Conseruation of Sound Neighborhoods\U7ilson's older grid neighborhoods west of theAtlantic Coastline Railroad are gracious, welltreed and attractive. They serve a diverse group ofwage eamers of moderate and middle incomefamilies, providing affordable standard housingwhich could not be duplicated in newconstruction. The very low tumover in theseneighborhoods underscores this fact. To conservethe aesthetic and functional qualities of theseneighborhoods the City should consider thefollowing policies: Require that additions tobuildings be architecturally compatible with thebasic structure; Provide a continuous program ofsidewalk, curb, gutter, drainage and pavingimprovements; and where older trees die or mustbe removed, implement a program of replacement.With respect to the latter recommendation, theCity could develop a nursery plant seedlings, andthereby be assured of a ready supply of street treesover a period of ten to fifteen years. It should alsobe noted that a program of tree propagation mayprovide educational and vocational training forlower-income, minority residents of l7ilson whocan enter this expanding and environmentally-oriented profession.

Rehabilitation of SubstandardNeighborhoodsThe low-income Black neighborhoods east of theSeaboard Coastline Railroad are characterized byseriously deteriorated housing located on unpavedstreets at a very high density and with insufficientopen space. Serious overcrowding of people inthese obsolescent and small strucrures mightsuggest to some that they should be replaced.However, such a goal is most likely unrealisticgiven current national housing subsidy policiesand priorities. Thus, the neighborhood should bemade as habitable as possible on a long-term basis.An asset worth capitalzing on in this effort is theproximity to the central business district andproposed activity centers there.

An effort to upgrade the condition of housing inthese neighborhoods has been impeded by the fact

that almost all of the substandard housing is

occupied by low.income tenants who have been

unable to support rental increases necessary toinduce their landlords to make improvements. It is

likely that some, and perhaps a substantial

number, of tenants will begin to enjoy greater and

more dependable incomes from steady

employment in the growing industrial sector.

Assuming this to be the case, certain measures

could be explored by both private and publicinterests to assist tenants in upgrading the

t., -)

rrEllFiHqlD ilH r

condition of their housing. Included among these

measures are: creation of a credit union by a

coalition of Black churches to make available totenants the funds required to purchase materialsfor making basic improvements. An agreement

from the landlords to refrain from increasing rents

during the term of the repayment period would be

necessary and perhaps, not difficult to obtainsince the landlords' property will be upgraded at

no cost to them. This could, in tum, constitute

the first step in the acquisition of these propefties

by the tenants (assuming a willing seller).

NNf.'$NN- \'' "\f - ttrrrAxDArD\ .6'\ V!#"'t\

It is, however, unlikely that renanrs will want tomake financial commitments to improve (or

purchase).their housing units unless the City ofWilson makes a commitment to providing muchneeded public improvements in theneighborhoods such as "forced" street pavings,storrn drainage, and recreational facil ities.Notwithstanding the fact that the City is facedwith difficult choices in allocating its scarceresources, the pace of these types of improvementsto date does not suggesr a sufficientpublic commitment.

Additionally, steps can be taken by the residentsjointly and by the City to upgrade the physicalcharacter of these neighborhoods. For example,the City could persuade owners of vacant lots tomake them available for recreational uses. Inconnection with this the City could offer trainingto neighborhood residents inrecreation supervision.

Shade TteesThe RJUDAf team found the contrasr berween thecharacter of older neighborhoods with tree-linedstreets and new subdivisions built uponagricultural land so marked that a requirement toplant shade trees in all new construction is

strongly recommended. If the City initiates a treenursery from seedlings, a ready supply of trees ofappropriate species and size will be assured for use

a decade hence. The Public Works Departmentcould manage cultivation, pest control and rootpruning. The contractor or homeowner can berequired to transplant and maintain new plantings,or, altematively, to purchase shade trees privately.

In order to assure that the long term objective ofenergy conservation is respected, new constructionshould require one, two or three shade treesplanted in order to provide shade for southemexposure of houses, and, in addition, a standard fortrees placed within the first 10 feet of the lot toprovide srreet shade should be established. Thiswill generally require one or two trees per housedepending upon lot width. Until such time as a

ready supply of City-grown trees is available, thecost of planting a minimum size tree (perh aps 3/+

inch caliper measured at a point 3Yz inches abovethe root)properly staked and wrapped, should beincluded in the per{ormance bond required ofsubdividers. This will be retumed to thehomeowner-not the builder-one year fromoccupancy. This will encourage the homeowner toproperly irrigate and cultivate his trees.

Land Available for Subdivision East ofthe RailroadFor as long as a policy of racial separation on

either side of the Seaboard Coastline Railroadpersists, the only new housing opportunities for

Blacks within \U7ilson lie east of Route 301 in thenewly annexed area. In order to provide Blacks

with a choice among a variety of housing types, a

more flexible tool is needed than the designationof nearly the entire area between the Norfolk and

Southem Railroad and Route 764 as R.1. Thislarge tract is under several ownerships, and

therefore PUD zoning might not apply. However,

by working with individual developers and

landowners, a plan for a series of diverse housing

clusters, incorporating group houses, garden

apaftments, duplexes and single family houses on

lots of several different sizes should be agreed

upon. The existing stream which courses throughthe area can become the basis of an open space

network which would connect the schools, parks,

and a proposed neighborhood shopping area onRoute 264. This is considered a high-priorityplanning task in the light of the recent approval oftwo subdivisions for Black developers in this area.

No further subdivisions should be approved untilthey can be made compatible with a plan.

N/-5tFltQr

rt_aq2EI

Institutions present in local communities shouldbe maintained and, where demand is present, newones should be developed. In the case of the Blackcommunity there is now a series of smallconvenience stores, which provide importantservices to the community.The present zoningregulations consider these stores non.conforming,thus inhibiting their improvement andthreatening their existence following a fire. A newzoning category should be created for areas whereautomobile ownership is low and oflstreet parkingrequirements and aesthetic considerations are

inappropriate and out of character wirh theneighborhods they serve. Old Mercy Hospital is a

significant structure. The cost of rehabilitating itfor use as multiple dwellings or comhunity use

may be prohibitive.

Wilson Central Business DistrictAlthough the central business district remains thecommercial, retail and institutional heart of thecity, there is evidence of the beginnings of themovement of some of these functions to otherdeveloping parts of the city. It is therefore timelyto undertake measures which will serve to

maintain the economic viability of the CentralBusiness District.

In this regard, the city should first establish clearphysical limits for the central core of retail,

commercial and govemmental activities. Thezoning ordinance should be revised, to the extentnecessary to reflect the changes proposed for theCBD, and a development plan of action should

become a matter of public policy so that locational

and capital improvement decisions by the public(state, county) and private sectors can be made inthe CBD.

Nonh Carolina

In addition to a clearly defined business district, a

network of interrelated activity centers whichcomplement existing commercial, retail, andinstitutional functions should be developed withinthe heart of Wilson. Community cultural centersshould be developed in and around the CBD. Thegreen space surrounding the'Wilson CountyPublic Library should be upgraded providingfacilities which promote educational activitiesassociated with this library. Numerous structures

within the central business district can be recycled

and used for a variety of activity centers. Inpafticulaq the old Cherry Hotel provides thelocation for facilities such as a residence for theelderly; a child care center; or a public healthfacility. Medical and nursing staff available in such

a health faciliry would be available to both theelderly and child care center. Jbbacco

warehouses-empty most of the year, and in less

demand of late as a result of recent technologicaldevelopments in the industry - could provide

facilities for the following uses: sports, arts and

crafts, teen-centers, roller-rinks, cultural centers

and museums. The present downtown water tower

could serve as an observation tower with an

associated recreational facility. The present

Railroad Passenger Depot could serve as a moregeneral Tiansport Center for a shuttle bus toFirestone and other outlying industrial locations.

As a means to accomplish renovation of the

central area a Downtown DevelopmentCorporation might be formed under joint public-private sponsorship. The Corporation could: (1)

Form a land bank with participants to "trade iri'their land for shares in the Corporation. Shares

would be on a deferred interest and principal basis

with distribution of developent proceeds passed

through to shareholders as development occurs. (2)

In exchange for land banking, shareholders should

be entitled to defered property taxation - the taxabatement to be covered by the city's general fund.After redevelopment the increased tax yields

should more than offset temporary tax losses and

reimburse the general funds. (3) A sale-lease back

formula involving public and private sectors to

achieve redevelopment objectives would operlte as

follows: Properties would be transferred by theDowntown Development Corporation to the cityas collateral for subordinated financing. Inexchange, the city would secure long-term low-

interest revenue bond financing for buildingimprovements or parking and industrialdevelopment financial altematives. The citywould then lease back or sell the improvements so

financed to the Corporation or its agent, retainingthe ground lease. Equitable payments-in-lieu-of-taxes can be built into the ground leases.

There are outstanding examples of Victorianresidences on the border of the central district. Inpast years some of the houses have beendemolished to permit the construction of new one-storey business buildings on the edge of thebusiness district. This intermixture of style andscale is not an effective urban design pattem. Acohesive streetscape of Victorian housing shouldbe maintained.

\07here practical, new activities should be fittedinto these valuable existing buildings. Newconstruction should apply compatible design

standards in order to maintain the unusual andirreplaceable atmosphere of these streets.

l+,r,lli*J:i+;F,rr{-i-qbl;iiiiiirr@*,,

L'\o3.bo

"})iu,-s7-A

t';r€

6tt'l]

IIt1lt

jil-rli' .a

'$'r*tT

Lynn, Massachuseffs

ft'!c FprQa L

7-r*rffi

f?"t**

172 Rebuilding in theWake of DisasterNovember, l98l

Lynn, Massachusefts

On November 29,1981, a conflagration engulfedthe downtown area of lrynn, Massachusetts. Newlyrenovated and existing buildings were razed in afire that destroyed five or six city blocks. Thisspectacle was viewed by persons across the nationon their television sets, and was repofted in all themajor newspapers. Site of a previous RJUDAf visitin December 1969, Iryrrn was selected for a second

visit following the fire.

Irynrls population of 78,000 in 1980 was downfrom 90,000 in 1970. Once a shipbuilding townand a major shipping and warehousing center forlumber and coal, Lynn slipped into gradualeconomic decline over the past fifty years. After\U(/orld rUUar II jobs and middle class residentsmigrated out of the city leaving behind a

population with a high concentration of socialand economic problems. Some progress atrevitalizing the downtown area had been made atthe time of the fire, but many other problemsremained. The following excerpt from the"lntroduction" in the R/UDAI report puts thegeneral issues into focus:

"Many changes are taking place in the region, thestate, and the nation which will drastically changethe economic, political and social context inwhich h.rn addresses its old problems tofind new opportunitiesJ'

"The fire, then, is a crisis which forces Lynn, itspeople, its political leaders, and its economiccommunity to use the rebuilding of its physicalfabric to improve the economic and socialconditions of its residents."

"Irynrfs problems are in some ways beyond itscontrol. As in many other small cities in theNorth East and Mid-lUest, industry has beenleaving and businesses have closed. Thepopulation is getting older and Irynrt's youngpeople are moving away. Minorities and newimmigrant groups have come to Irynn nevertheless,finding opportunities that are better than whatthey have elsewhere."

"l{r,. has some special problems, too. On theNorth Shore, it is "the city in betweenl' [t has

remained a blue collar community whilecommunities around it have become chic andattracted middle class residents, shopping centers,good restaurants - and tax dollars. Irynn has

become increasingly poor. The city, to its credit,has not tumed away from the pressing needs of itsincreasing numbers of poor, and in the past decade

has provided its people with an impressive array ofsocial services and housing aidl'

"These are not new problems. Irynn has thoughtabout them and responded to them. There are

three new reasons, however, why Irynrfs long-standing and special problems callfor new responses."

Lynn, Massachuserls

t74 "The fire. The fire raises immediate issues oftemporary relocation of people and the perrnanentrelocation of industry. But more importantly, itcalls for a new look at the revitalization strategies

which were planned to link with areas thatwere levelled]'

"The Heritage Park and the Community Collegein particular are two major, welcomed public

investments which need to be reassessed. Howthese are built and the image they set will attract

national attention. Th.y should reflect thethinking of state and local officials who have

looked creatively at the new oppoftunities whichhave been opened up. What the private sector

does now-the major corporations as well as the

small businesses can similarly capture nationalattention and create a new feeling ofpride in Irynnl'

"Proposition}lzz \7hi1e tax caps are not new,

Lynn is just now entering the difftcult second year

in a series of budget cuts in response to a state

mandate. Total costs of running city govemmentand providing services have increased, especiallysince the city has, in recent years, considerablyimproved the level of professionalism in planningand other services. It has to cut back costs, findingways to meet the needs -and yet finding money tosupport new efforts, tool'

'T.{ew Federal Policies: Washington seems remote

from lrynn, but its influence in dollars andprograms has been substantial. Irynn has benefittedfrom programs to help distressed people and places.

The availability of housing subsidies and low costloans for rehabilitation has shaped I4rnrls housingstrategies; social service grants have funded anarray of local community agencies; and federalgrants have funded substantial portions of recenteconomic development projects. The newadministration has announced major changes inall these areas. Cuts in dollars for social servicespresent the most immediate challenge. Equallyimportant, however, is the intention to shift moreresponsibilities to the states, local govemmentsand people themselves."

The l4rnn R/UDAI study is a fine example of theability of the team to perceive a whole set of issues

related to their original mission. The report is

both comprehensive and detailed, and contains aremarkable section on the economic feasibility ofrenovating buildings.

Lynn RJUDAI Study. [ry.., Massachusetts,

January 28-February 1, 1982.Gam members: Charles M. Davis FAIA,Chairman; Phyllis Myers; Rick Kuner AICP; JohnP. Clarke, AIA/AICP; Harold K. Bell; CharlesHarper, AIA.

Lynn, Massachuserrs

176 Context HistoryIrynn was settled approximately 350 years ago by

North Shore colonists in search of fertileagricultural land. Early settlement pattems were

concentrated in the areas of the present

downtown, the waterfront, and Westem Avenue.

Although they looked for fertile lands, many ofIrynns early settlers continued to practice theirleather shoemaking skills brought from Europe.

Expanding upon this resource, Irynn successfully

attracted other skilled immigrants. Small-scale

shoe manufacturers joined forces to make Irynt

one of the world's most important shoe

manufacturing centers.

From 1800 to 1920lrynns waterfront activitiesgrew as well. Ship-building, shell fishing, salt-

making, boxmaking, and watepcommerce inlumbeE coa[, and shoes are all a part of l4rnriswaterfront heritage.

The Great Fire of 1889 demolished some of theharbor industries, but the city quickly rebuilt. Theharbor was dredged and filled numerous times toaccommodate the heavy port activities for coaland crude materials used by the growing GeneralElectric Company.

Soon, howeveq Irynn was faced with a series ofchanges which were to cause cycles of turmoil forfifty years:

rRailroad competition in freight transport caused

I-y.rn Harbor to decline.oDuring the 1930's unions and foreign competition

caused the shoe industry to contract.oAn out-migration of both residents and lobs

occured after World War II.o Urban renewal projects of the 1960's razed intact

sections of the city without significantlyalleviating commercial and residential distress.

o I4,nris population declined from 90,000 in 1970 to

78,000 in 1980.

Today, I-y.rn is at an important crossroads. The cityknows what it has lost. Irynn is working creativelyto enhance its many remaining resources. [t has

the pride and strength of its heritage upon whichto build.

A municipality's decisions about development andgrowth becomes the footprint of its identity. I-ynnis no exception. Its existing land uses not only set

the context in which downtown needs andopportunities emerge; they also reflect the historyof Irynns development psychology.

Past Development and Resulting DilemmaIry..t, like many other similar metropolitan cities,has suffered because of population shifts, suburbanexpansion, major regional mall competition withexisting downtown business districts, obsolete

publ ic transportation systems, highway bypass

problems, limited industrial growth and movement

out of the Northeast, high utility and energy costs,

and a maturing population. The Ciry has limitedability to organize its assets to protect its tax base

and encourage regeneration by keeping andcontinuing to attract a young and energeticmiddle-class population.

Limited private development and neighborhoodstability have caused a pervasive contraction of thebusiness district, a decline in the quality of life inresidential areas, an abandonment of housing, a

limiting of industrial opportunities, and a lack ofsubstantial private development.

The City has become in some cases the developer(or at least the catalyst) of last resoft. [t has in ouropinion done a magnificent job in attractingvarious govemmental funds and has fought a good

holding action. It has been a fine public developer.

The time is now drawing near for that public

development to bear fruit in private initiative.Private development in today's cities isinextricably linked to public suppoft, placement ofinfrastructure, interest and real estate tax

assistance - all in varying amounts and

combinations. The development agencies in Irytttt

understand thoroughly this linkage. Private

ddvelopment will take hold and thrive withintelligent public support.

GrowthManagement

Lynn, Massachuserr.s

t78 The City nevertheless must establish its

development priorities. A contraction of thedowntown business district is natural at this time,and the eventual regrowth of the C.B.D. will comeabout through the remagnetizing of thedowntown. The abandoned housing stock and

demolition on housing sites are admittedlyproblems. But they can also be viewed as

community assets to be warehoused andhusbanded until the time is ripe to support aninfill housing program.

The immediate priority is the planning andsponsorship of a major phased privatedevelopment of the Waterfront. In addition, highpriority should be given to the development of thesouthem Gateway entrance to the City, the firesite, the MBTA transit station site, the UnionStreet Mall, and new industrial parks. At the same

time, the rehabilitation and maintenance of theCity's housing stock must be fostered

and encouraged.

Professional TeamOne of Irynrls greatest assets is the professionalism

of its devetopment and planning staff. Theircompetence, dedication and enthusiasm have

been an important factor in the progress that has

been made.

There are signs that I4rnn is tuming around. theCity staffhas worked hanJ to maintain the gainsthat have been made. Moving forwarrd from thispoint is, thus, not as difficult as it might havebeen, given the problems of the past decades.

The staff has succeeded in retaining andimproving the housing stock and developing theemployment base. Working with communitygroups and the business community, they have

formed the linkages and established the programs

that are making Lynn a "City of Opportunity."

A Planning Direction for the Future:Redirected GrowthAt the moment, hn.r is interested in taking stock

of its history and its present developmentproblems. It has demonstrated a desire to effect

real solutions. The time is ripe for a majorplanning effort directed at the downtown and theother areas of the city which will impact directlyon any hopes for a revitalized downto\iln.

The R/UDAT team has proposed a plan fordeveloping the waterfront and downtown areas ofthe city. In order to ensure that the RJUDATproposal or any other downtown plan succeeds,

the City must pursue a rigorous planning andrequest-forprcposal process culminating in astrategy for attracting the best design anddevelopment possible.

A national marketing task lies ahead. Cities are indirect competition with each other. The prize ofrejuvenation belongs to aggressive city officialswho actively seek and shape developer solutions,not to the city that takes just what it can get froma local developer.

180 Moderate-income neighborhoods are essential tothe needs of lrynns population. Therefore, theCity, while redirecting growth in the \Uaterfrontarea, must take steps to protect itsexisting neighborhoods.

Similarly, the city must encourage the retention ofthe existing older housing stock close to thedowntown area because it provides needed low-and moderate-income rental housing tothe community.

In order to ensure that growth is redirected andproceeds on a course beneficial to the City as a

whole, Irynn should pursue the fotlowing goals:

. Review zoning ordinances.oMopt standards for use permits.rMake zoning consistent with the land use plan.. Preserve existing residential areas..'Warehouse residential land and prepare forinfill use.

oCreate a rational plan for future industrial landswhich does not adversely impactexisting residential areas or efforts fordowntown revitalization.

r Respect the integrity and value of the waterfrontand link the development to downtown.

Public hrceptionInformal interviews of people who live and workin I4rnn were conducted throughout the R/UDATvisit. The responses indicate that Iryn , suffers froma poor image that only intensifies the sense ofhopelessness that people communicate.

0.A.A.

"What comes to mind when I say Lynn?""Fires."

"Unsophisticatedl'A. 'An older city struggling real hard to survive."A. "Too many old peoplei'A. "[4rnn is the only city in the country where they

ever closed a McDonald'sl"

Q. "What is the problem downtown?"A. "The problem is a customer calls to ask where

the store is located, and there's no way I cantell him."

A. "Downtowrfs a mess. I dont think it should betom down, howeverl'

A. "[ think the new college will help. I hope theplans don't get changed on that projectJ'

A. "Downtown's a dangerous place . . . prostitutesand drugs."

Despite these responses to Irynn's general image,there are some positive perceptions aboutneighborhood activities that indicate oprimism.As one woman stated, "lf there's something goodto be said about l-ry.r,, it should be about some ofthe wards where people are fixing things up, andkeep a watch out on crime - like the area aroundGoldfish Pondl'

A city policy officer commented, "There's a lot ofmedia hype happening with the fire situation,being in this type of negative limelight affects thepeopleJ' and a downtown merchant reflected,"\U7here else but Lynn?" that's what we hear.

'r"b\;4 t8t

Lynn, Massachu.serrs

182 Any city that has undergone the serious changes

and problems that l-ytt.t has faced will eventuallyexperience detrimental image problems. It is clear

that before people will perceive downtownrevitalization positively they will have to be betterinformed about the successful changes that are

already taking place.

Physical Conceptsh.r., is a complicated city with complicated issues

in its downtown. Once we had understoodsomething about how it worked, we put this in thecontext of what we knew about cities anddowntowns everywhere. The following conceptsguide our perceptions of the physical problems and

our responses to the challenges they pose.

A city is a world of connective and supportiveexperiences. The density is the reason for peoplebeing there. The downtown experience is a

background for activity, for even denser

gatherings. The city must be a continuousexperience.

Single buildings, detached from their context, are

usually at odds with the city experience. They are

isolated visually and by walking distance.

A city node that becomes an isolated enclave does

not offer its neighbor activity support, and it does

not receive such support.

The city center, if it works, pulls other parts of thecity togetheq since it acts as a common meetingground and place of transition to other places.

Defining an entry to a city offers orientation andthe security of knowing the limits of an area.

Making a pleasant experience of entry reinforcesexpectations and supports the transitionexperience.

landmarks provide orientation and help make thecity comprehensible. Th.y can be buildings orother memorable objects.

The Watertront/GatewayAdversity has created opportunity. Theunfoftunate fire has afforded the citizens of Iqrnn aunique chance to reassess the downtown district.Seventeen buildings are gone. A valuable site viralto the rebirth of Irynn has emerged.

The current plans for the Heritage State Park onthe waterfront, the location of the CommunityCollege, the possible realignment of the Irynnway,the size and scope of the proposed SeaportHousing, and Commercial Development Project,the Port, the recreation and industrial use of the\Taterfront all must be reevaluated.

The dismal appearance of the southem entries tothe City must be addressedThe development ofthe waterfront from Saugus to Swampscott andGateway Developmenr must be linked. Phaseddevelopment should be integrally tied to a

public/private paftnership.

Residential neighborhoods are fragmented anddecentralized. They surround a no.longer vitaldowntown commercial district and anunderut i I ized waterfront.'l07ithout a downtownand waterfront functioning as unifi,ing force,segments of the population have becomephysically separated from each other, unaware oftheir place in the city as a whole.

The Development Plan we propose includesfree market housing, motel andmarina, modest restaurant and touristdevelopment, hotel, office building, recrearion,state park, community college, vehicular andpeople movement, powerline relocation, in anexpanded, exciting waterfront/gateway district. It isthe focal point of the rejuvenation of tryn.r.

e'6*^rm

ffif or u.flvN

lf {, r*r#t;

,A .. .)'-ffi

Lynn, Massachusetts

184 Housing OpportunitiesThere are many opportunities to add a significantnumber of housing units in the city. Some of the

opportunities involve developing new multiple'family housing. In addition, existing medium tolarge buildings can be adaptively reused to provide

in-town housing. A number of threedecker units

can be replanned to provide units of increased

quality conforming to current living standards.

Some large single-family units and many othersingle family units could either be subdivided or

added onto to provide additional single rentalunits. The simple zoning devices of allowing some

single-family zones to become two-family zones

will permit such expansion. Restraints such as

minimum lot areas, parking requirements, fireprotections, and dwelling unit area limitations are

necessary to protect the general welfare.

The obvious advantages to the owners includecurrent tax incentives and additional income to

offset debt service. The advantages to thecommunity and the general public include greater

choices of housing types, an increase in housing

stock, and the direct and indirect benefit ofconservation - conservation of man-made

resources, energy and natural resources, and lesser

pressures for new development on open lands.

I n-Tow n Housing StrategiesA comprehensive inner-city housing strategy willbuild on the existing neighborhood strengths and

city programs now in place.

Objectives should include encouraging home

ownership for younger families, especially in close-

in neighborhoods, increasing the level of upkeep

and maintenance of houses, preserving historicqualities in individual houses and sffeetscapes,

while at the same time protecting housing forelderly and low-income renters.

These new program directions are not meant todiminish the current strengths of Irynrt's

neighborhood conservation and neighborhoodconfidence,building programs managed throughthe Department of Community Development.These vital neighborhood programs should be

maintained and expanded to encourage additionalneighborhood self-help and communityinvolvement throughout the city.

Increase Ownership Opportunities. The Cityshould continue to use all available programs and

resources to suppoft increased home ownership.Aggressive marketing of below-market home

moftgage funds and rehabilitation funds (thru

Massachusetts Home Mortgage Finance Agencyand CDBG programs) should be undertaken, incooperation with local banks and savings

institutions, to keep available an adequate supply

of mortgage financing for homes and

condominiums. Together with finance suppoft,

condominium ownership and development ofsmaller rental units should be encouraged.

e,',lfr/, ralilHat*5

186 Rehabilitation. Continued use of available

assistance for middle income rehabilitationactivities should be encouraged. Special attentionshould be given to ownepoccupant and landlord

rehab assistance.

InfillA{ew Construction. The feasibility ofinfill/new construction housing development

should be closely examined. The program should

include single.lot opportunities to strengthen

otherwise stable neighborhoods. Small'scale

development programs in neighborhoods such as

the lower end of Sagamore Hill, where cosiderable

vacancy exists, should be encouraged. In all cases,

new housing should be directed toward the owner'

occupant market.

The single or small lot program, initiallyconcentnlting on tax-title propefty, should use allexisting road and infrastructure services, be

compatible with existing densities, and

architecturally compatible with the neighborhood.

Technical approaches to development should

include: relocation of houses from softer areas or

re-development sites, use of currently available

industrial/pre-fabricated building systems and

traditional small-scale

new construction.

Design ControlAs the city rebuilds itself, it has an unusualopportunity to insist on the best in design fromthe private developers who will service lrynn. Ahodge-pod ge of second-class architecture plantedin the middle of the city is easy to achieve. Butarchitecture that witl make the citizens of Irynnproud, and be an attraction and the envy ofsurrounding cities will require vigilance andcompetent independent design advice. Irynn nowhas the chance to tie its historic heritage, itslandmark buildings, and renewed appreciation ofits past to architecture that can be pleasing foryears to come.

Seattle, Washington

Living DowntownMay, 198,

Seattle is beyond doubt one of the most livable

cities in America. It has a fine climate. It'stopography is thrilling, offering magnificent views

to the mountains and water as well as variety tothe streets and walkways. It has a myriad ofteeming activities in a downtown that includes

one of the most exciting waterfront markets in theworld. It is a progressive city. There is diversity inthe ethnic backgrounds of the citizens, and they

are concemed, organized and accustomed to

speaking out at public meetings. The city enjoys

good govemment and it appears to possess

a sound economy.

As part of a long-terrn examination of land use

policies by the planning office and concemedcitizens, zuUDAT was called in to probe specific

issues relating to the future of downtown housing.

Support from the citizens, city hall and the localsteering committee for the effort was

unprecedented.

Decline of housing in the downtown area over thepast couple of decades provided a focus forproblems presented to the R/UDAT team. People

were moving to single family houses in theoutreaches of the city limits, or even in thesuburbs. In addition, some areas had becomeunattractive for residential life. Poor shoppingfacilities, little opportunity for recreation, lack ofsecurity on the streets, and a pervasive absence ofamenities which can make downtown living so

desirable - all these conditions were contributingto a general decline in the quality of life in innercity residential areas. Finally, the costs of land andbuildings, as well as regulatory processes forrehabilitation and new construction were stiflingdevelopment activity.

Against this broad spectrum of issues theR/UDAT team mapped out a diverse set ofstrategies for providing a new residentialenvironment in downtown Seattle. As a first step,

the team made a critical anatysis of principaldowntown neighborhoods. Its suggestions were

structured into three pafts: Observations, issues

and ideas. ttrThite there was similarity of problemsfrom one neighborhood to another, most of thesuggestions were specific to the area. The teamidentified three area-wide issues to which itdevoted a substantial effort: The zoning envelopeas a mechanism for controlling views and urbanscale; the restructuring of public agencies

concemed with Seattlds physical future; andfinancing mechanisms that could be utilized tobring all these ideas into realiry.

Most R/UDAf visits deal with a variety of issues

which combine to produce a situation ofdesperation to local citizens The Seattle R/UDAIwas unique in that it dealt with a single,comprehensive issue in a large city which, in allother respects, possesses one of the mostliveable urban environments in the nation.

Seattle R/UDAT Study. May 1981, Seattle,\Uashington.

.[bam members: Jules Gregory FAIA,

Chairman; Charles Davis, FAIA; Frank Fish,AICP; John Herman; John Desmond, FAIA;George Grier; and Lee Sammons.

Seattle, Washington

t92 Existing Conditions

Market Context

Regional SettingSet at the eastem edge of Puget Sound, Seattle

provides a focus for much of the activity thatcharacterizes the Puget Sound region. A majorport, the City of Seattle serves as a focus of trade,

business, industry and transpoftation for theregion as a whole. As the largest city in the region,

the city and its people are a cultural and

recreational hub, not only for the Puget Sound

area, but for the Pacific Northwest.

Downtown Seattle, in similar fashion, provides a

focus for much of the activity of the city. Business,

govemment, industry and commerce are centered

downtown, and the people who work and live inthe city find a focus for cultural andrecreational activity.

Early history has left a legacy of older housingstock which now provides basically low-cost

housing and small units, particularly old hotelsand rooming houses. In contrast, non-subsidizednew construction is very expensive, due tocommercial land values and the cost ofnew construction.

it However one stratifies the various housing

markets, only a small portion of the total market isreally attracted to a downtown location. Even

those who profess to desire convenience, proximityto work, and an "urban environment" find this, by

their definition, in large portions of Seattle near

to, but not within, the downtown area. As anindication of the size of this market, only 11,150

people out of a four-county region total of2,175,300 currently live in the downtown area;

and of the metropolitan growth of 236,600 people

in the past decade, there was only a net incresase

o{ 7 55 in the downtown area. In the first half ofthe decade, while growth in the metropolitan area

was negligible, the downtown area lost populationin all sectors except the Pioneer Square census

tract (perhaps indicating an increase inunemployed "street people"). Since L975, whenthe metro area experienced 85o/o of its decade's

growth, all of the downtown neighborhoods except

Pioneer Square and the International Districtregained and surpassed 1970 population levels.

194 Market SecforsThere are several demographic groups that havehistorically lived downtown or are potentialresidents. There are other groups that may desireto live downtown but are unable to affod housingthere - at least without subsidy. The key marketgroups are:

oSingle-room occupancy (SRO). This unit type,characterized by a single room without cookingfacilities, is prevalent in the downtown area andrepresents a continuing need. While thepopulation requiring such facilities may not be

expanding, there is a continuing loss of unitsavailable to the existing population throughdemolition, deterioration, and economicobsolescence.

oYoung professional. The downtown workeqwhether living alone, married, or sharing housingexpenses with other workers, is a large, growing,and logical market for downtown housing. It has

been the largest demand sector for new housing inother cities. Projected commercial construciton indowntown Seattle assures the continued viabilityof this market segment.

oService worker. The downtown service workertepresents another local market, but these personsgenerally have a lower income than theprofessional and need more moderately-pricedhousing. Nevertheless, they are price-sensitive,and if decent housing can be made available, theywill carefully figure the cost of commuting saved intheir housing expenditure equation.

oThe empty-nester. The middle-aged couple whosechildren have grown is a substantial marketsegment for condominium and higher-densityhousing types. Howeveq thete is no naturalattraction to the downtown area unless they are

still employed there while attractive, amenity-filled projects elsewhere in the metropolitan area

may be very competitive.

oCorporate purchaser. Many downtown housing

units, particularly condominiums, are purchasedby businesses or businessmen who use them fortemporary residences, putting up visitors, andother uses which basically substitute for hotelrooms. While this might be a specialized marketfor certain projects, it should not be encouragedwhere a residential environment of some stabilityand community is to be established.

rllxury units. the downtown area provides a uniquecombination of urban amenity and waterfront viewand activity. This is likely to appeal to a certainsegment of the market, particularly condominiumpurchases, regandless of their current or prior tiesto downtown.

Seattle, Washington

196 Certain household types have not been described

here, and while they may occur downtown in small

numbers, do not generally represent a sufficiently-large, or even appropriate, market for downtownhousing. Most notable of these is families.

Presently, only 74o/o of Seattlds households have

children, despite the fact that over 607o of thecity's units are single-family units which, for themost paft, are in what are thought to be attractiveneighborhoods and a suitable, familyenvironment. Certainly in other large citieschildren have been provided for and effectivelyraised in an urban environment. However, withoutthat tradition in the Seattle area, it is unlikely thatsufficient market support would exist for familydevelopments in the downtown area, even if child-oriented amenities were provided. An exceptionmight be housing particularly oriented to thesingle-parent family in a low or moderate unitclose to downtown employment or educationalfacilities.

Another market which probably cannot be fullyserved by downtown location is the moderate

income wage eamer, for whom no subsidy

programs are available, yet who cannot afford

market,rate new construction. Although it will be

difficult to provide this housing in the downtownarea, there are many rental apaftment unitsserving this market sector in close-in

neighborhoods near downtown.

Ballpark ForecastsMany of these market categories have beenmeasured and forecast in the city's planningstudies and project analyses. However, they are notmutually exclusive, nor can it be said withprecision what share of each market group couldbe attracted to downtown, and under whatcircumstances. Nevertheless, some general scale

can be placed on the likely downtown market overthe next decade.

The Puget Sound Council of Govemments has

forecast an increase of 394,700 people in the four-

county region over the next decade. Through a

computer allocation process, it has been estimatedthat downtown Seattle (a definition that isgeographically wider than we are using here) wouldhave a net increase of only 414 households (about

800 people). Even when adjusted to reflectgovernment policies to restrict suburban sprawl,

the downtown forecast is only for 1,680

households (or about 3,000 people). \7e would notsuggest that the computepgenerated forecast

provides any real constraint on what can or willbedone in the downtown area, but it does describe

the magnitude of the task facing Seattle if it is to

substantially increase the rate of housingproduction, rehabilitation, or even preservation inthe downtown area.

The entire city of Seattle itself has only receivedabout one percent of the new residentialconstruction in the four-county metropolitanregion in the boom period following 1975. AndSeattle's market is also different from that of themetropolitan area as a whole, just as the downtownarea is different from the city. From the metro tothe city to downtown, there is a consistent pattemof increasing age of housing, increasing multi-family construction, decreasing household size,

increasing share of single-person households, anddecreasing household incomes. The importantelement of this mix is that 40 percenr of thehouseholds in the city of Seattle (and 85 percentof those downtown) are single-person households.And while much is made of the social problemsassociated with the indigent elderly and streetpeople of downtown, it is obvious that much ofthe city's one.person households are living inother pafts of the city, including single.familyhomes, and that they represent a full range ofincomes and backgrounds. This is a positivemarket factor for the future of downtown housingin that many of these people may eventually tire ofmaintaining and paying for the utilities in single.family neighborhoods. Will these housesdeteriorate due to an inability to affordmaintenance; or will they be rejuvenated as

family housingl

,98 Five key factors support the stength of thehousing market in the doryntown area:

oThe increasing cost in fuel, time, andinconvenience of commuting.

o The large reservoit of potential occupants alreadywithin the city.

o The continued growth of the downtownemployment base.

oA nationwide phenomenon, shared by Seattle,that is eliminating the stigma ofliving downtown.

o The cumulatively improving image, acceptability,and security which occurs as new housingis added.

On the other hand, there ane several negativefactors which limit the market fordowntovm housing.

rThe price of land which, in tum, dictates a high-densiry high-priced construction cost which, intum, results in an appeal to a limited segment ofthe market for market-rate housing.

rThe virtual elimination of subsidized housingprograms by the Reagan administration -prcgrams that have provided much of the impetusfor what recent downtown housing developmentand redevelopment has occurred.

On balance, it is likely that the rate of housingproduction in downtown Seattle will increase inthe future. But the market is finite, and downtownstill must compete in the metrcpolitan context.

I7hile city policies and subsidy progmms cangreatly influence the rate of construction, it is

likely that Seattle will see 200 to 400 units peryear built within the downtown area as defined inthis analysis. Virtually all will be higher densityunits, with townhouses and lower density stylesprovided only as a paft of multi-use complexes. Itis also unlikely that the vast majority of these

units will be condominium units with a highdollar-per-square-foot price, although smallet unitsmight be affondable when compared to otherownership altematives within the city. Moderateincome housing will be provided primarily by therehabilitation of existing units, smaller-size unitsin new projects, and in other nearby

neighborhoods.

DevelopmentSetting

Government Process

Downtown Seattle has been depicted as an areacomprised of a number of distinct, identifiabledistricts. Among the districts are those which bothpresently and historically are pertinent to the issue

of living dorvntown:

o Pioneer Squareo Intemational DistrictoDenny Regradee Pike Placeo Central \Taterfront

Regulatary $tandardsSeattle has a relatively complex downtownregulatory scene, with a zoning onCinance designedto reward certain design features with floor areabonuses and an overlaying of numerous specialdistricts and zones. Examples include historicdistricts, such as the Pioneer Square and PikeMarket area, the added requirements of an urbanrenewal plan in Pike Market, and the specialzoning category to encourage residential mixeddevelopment in the Regrade area.

\7hi1e the bonus system is fairly straightforward inthe commercial CBD district, it is overlaid with a

process bonus where substantial floor area ratio(FAR) increments are allowed for responding tovarious design criteria. An absolute EAR of ten ispossible; in other words, a floor area of ten timesthe site. This allows twenry floors with 50 percentsite coverage. The high allowable EAR effeetivelynegates an innovative tool, the authority totransfer development rights, because such adevelopment rights acquisition is unnecessary.

[n three of the downtown zones, the combinationof special district controls and zoning alone rarherrigorously constrain new development. The extentof current development, plus these design controlseffectively preclude major design swings in termsof housing development in the Pike Market,Pioneer Square, or Intemational District. On theother hand, in the central waterfront area and theDenny Regrade, cunent design and zoning controlsprovide considerable flexibility and major design-related housing disputes have arisen in both areas.

Seattle, Washington

><=:-. I l

Forces similar to those which have resulted indown-zoning in the single family areas are at work

in the CBD, i.e., a general citizen sense thatdensities are too high and are inappropriate for the

character of Seattle. In addition, the fear of

neighborhood displacement and modificationwhich generates opposition to high density in asingle-family neighborhood has its more poignant

parallel in the opposition of existing residents inthe downtown area to displacement of low-income

SRO renters.

It is our perception that these CBD complaintsabout excessive zoning authorizations and

concems about displacement are receiving a

positive reaction from city officials. The city has,

for example, enacted a displacement ordinancewhich e:€cts relocation payments and a

displacement fee from developers who remove theexisting housing stock. Similarly, there appears to

be general recognition that the Regrade zoning

category has failed so far in its purpose toencourage a livable residential environment. Afurther indication of the apparent responsiveness

of city officials to neighborhood objectionsregarding new housing has been their tacitencouragement of one on one neighborhoodactivist-developer negotiations as paft of the State

Environmental Policy Act regulatory process. Thisprocess, in which a detailed environmental impact

statement is required on the specific project,provides a ready forum for appeals which delaydevelopment. [n this regard, SEPA has moreinfluence on housing design than the specified

regulatory prccesses.

lI.!-x-k

Government as a PromoterPerhaps no area is more lacking in terms of thegovemment and housing in Seattle thanthe new tools being utilized by other urbancenters to encourage and direct development bygovemmental participation. Although, of course,Seattle has utilized the federal programs such as

the Section 8 Rent Subsidies, the 312 low lnterestLoan Program, Block Grants, and earlier, urbanrenewal bonds, the extent of direct govemmentalparticipation and promotion of development hereis minimal. 1U7hi1e there are advantages that haveaccrued from this absence (such as the avoidanceof large-scale clearance in the early sixties) withthe likely end of the currently available federaltools, the absence of the normal state and localmechanisms to participate in, encourage, anddirect development severely limits opportunitiesfor creative responses to the displacement anddevelopment control problems. For example, whileother cities have encouraged construction ofmoderate income condominiums in downtownareas through tax-exempt revenue bonds, Seattlescondominium stock is almost entirely upperincome. Commonly, other urban areas have

assembled land, developed design criteria, andselected the most responsive private developer,with land writedown and amenity constructioninducements. Outside of the Pike Market area,

there is no evidence of such ability to controldevelopment or to encourage its site-specificoccurrence. Perhaps the best example of therelative desirability of such an approach is thedesign responsiveness of the Market North projectaccomplished on publicly acquired land after a

design selection process.

Governmental StructureIn most cities with which the R/UDAT team is

famil iar, the planning-zoning function, whichincludes comprehensive plans, zoning textdevelopment, and thereafter design andenvironmental (EIS) evaluation and review, iscentralized in a planning department. Generallythis also relates to a city planning commissionwhich has a direct advisory role in the criticalpath of development approval. Housing andeconomic development promotional activities arelocated in a separate promotional housing orredevelopment authority which has access to manyof the above-noted govemmental tools to promotedevelopment. Building permit review is largelyadministrative and occurs at the tait end of theprocess.

Seattle, Washington

ZO2 In Seattle, these functions are split in a novel

fashion. It is our perception that this division has

weakened the lineage between developmentpromotion and the profit and nonprofitdevelopment community, as wellas weakened the

relationship between establishing overall long-termgoals and specific regulatory review. Finally, the

separation of environmental and design review inthe building code agency- the Department ofConstruction and land Use-has removed these

functions from the more natural location in theplanning and zoning area. Under Seattle's system,

the Office of Policy and Evaluation, a long-termplanning arm, is responsible only for thepreparation of the comprehensive p[an. One result

is the comprehensive plan becomes a specific

document as a way for that agency to conttol the

zoning text which is written in a separate agency'

Community Development. This agency, inaddition to code preparation, is also involved inpromotional functions including the limitedhousing development financing functions

available to Seattle through distribution of federal

Section 8 and block grant funds. It also has design

review functions in the Denny Regrade area. Allother design and environmental reviews are

located in the building permit division of the city.

Downtown Building EnvelopeModifications to height and bulk regulations have

recently been considered for the Regrade area.

These modifications have been based primarily onprotection of views of the bay from inland. Thiswould be achieved by adopting a sloped zoning

"envelopd' within which building heights would

be relatively low along First Avenue, but increasing

incrementlly toward Fifth Avenue. This R/UDAIteam recommends that such changes be seriously

considered by the city. In addition, in configuringthe envelope, the city should also consider a

tapering down of heights toward the north.Gpering down to both the west and the nofthwould result in a pyramidal zoning envelope.

Tgp*t Tuots tuniltd S Exshg TDt iU

tt Ir]

ll[\\[L

ffi'&,Ouiaorl$,7/\

lrlY ,1'

irli,"

fuliu thra btg@rdk fubh'a MbpithWwd lfughl l.ttti+s

Seattle, Washington

The RegulatoryProcess

Such a device would serve several purposes. Itwould help preserve views. It would serve as a

transition to lower Queen Anne Hill. It wouldprevent high-rise buildings from encroaching onthe Space Needle, which is a Seattle landmark. Itwould, in a sense, "rebuild" Denny Hill, a

topographic feature that was destroyed in the earlyJwentieth Century. Finally, the zoning envelopewould "hold the line" on high-rise development,serving notice to land owners and developers thatthey could not pepper the Regrade withfreestand ing high-rise fortresses. Tirre high-risetowers would be reserved for the southerly portionof the Regrade and, of course, the downtown core.

This has, in fact, already been done in SanFrancisco to protect the scale of areas surrounding

the CBD with height limits dropping from 700feet to 65 feet.

It appears that there are four major regulatorycontrols in Seattle. They are:

oComprehensive PlanoTaning OrdinanceoBuilding CodeoState Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)

Comprehensive PlanSeattle is to be commended for undertaking a

Comprehensive Plan update. The parts of the planthat are completed appear to protect and maintainthe existing single-family areas and the low-scale

character of multi-family neighborhoodssurrounding downtown. This can be expected towin popular and political acceptance while at thesame time focusing higher density developmentdowntown. In this process it is hoped that the planwiIltry to establish goals for the following factorsin the downtown:

r Integration of housing and commercialdevelpment in the CBD.

o Maintenance of existing moderate and low-incomehousing.

o Establishment of a variety of scales and densities.o Protection of existing neighborhoods.

\07e also suggest that specific neighborhood actionsnot wait three to four years until completion of thep[an. This is pafticularly importanr in the DennyRegrade area. An interim enactment is vital ifSeattle is to grasp the opportunity to expanddowntown living.

Zoning OrdinanceThe following zoning recommendations endorse

policy changes aheady being considered.

o Maximize the 'As-of-Right" Situation. Bonuses

and other incentives should always be seen as

clearly d iscret ionary. The'hs-of-right" proposal(one which observes all requirements) should begiven automatic approval, without hearing ordelay. The prime purpose of zoning is health andsafety which directly relates to permitted use,

height, bulk and access/parking. Good design andaesthetics are more susceptible to opinion andvarious approaches and should be subject todiscretionary negotiation.

oChange the Floor Area Ratio bonus system toencourage housing. The city has recognized thatthe plaza and arcade bonuses are questionable.

Bonuses for the provision or retention of housing

should be increased, particularly in the CBDwhich is becoming a single-use 8 a.m.to 5 p.m. area.

oShorten and Clarify the Negotiation Process. It is

important that the rezoning process itself be:predictable, clear, and timely.

e Revise the Zoning for Denny Regade. The present

zoning for Denny Regrade sees the area as an

extension of the CBD in terms of height and bulk(EAR 10). It is recommended that the bonuses be

revised to encourage low-rise housing.

Seattle, Washington

lZrratcd gp ltld-Bttu

Building CodeThe existing building code is a sound andprogressive code. We see no need for changes.

State Environmental fulicy ActWe would make two major recommendations toimprove the SEPA process:

rConduct a generic EIS on neighborhood levels.Individual projects would then require anamendment or simply a technical review.

o Increase thresholds. The threshold forenvironmental consideration should be for projects

over 100 units or perhaps 300 to bring it in linewith state procedure. Reviews of projects of under100 units should not be necessary.

tuMgMiHb&@LW

Orw 7d€a -fr/ lav 1o frlra fube

Program for Action The R/UDAI Steering Committee will continueto involve the Downtown Seattle Community inthe R/UDAI Process. The Committee will workwith governmental agencies, the general publicand interesr groups to assess the R/UDAT repoft,prioritize recommendations, aid in initiatingaction and identify potentials for earlyimplementation.

In order to sustain and enhance communicationwithin the Community, the RIUDAf SteeringCommittee will publish a newsletter. Thisnewsletter will be distributed to all members of theAdvisory Committee, and will be made availableto all other interested individuals at the SeattleChapter Offices of the AIA at 1911 First Avenue.To begin the Action Process for the RIUDATproposals for Seattle, the Steering Committee willdistribute a Response Forum, to identifii the levelof support for the various R/UDATrecommendations. This Response Forum will bedistributed in the same manner as the Newsletter.

Seattle, Washington

Birmingham, Alabama

2to NeighborhoodRepresentation in

the Planning ProcessOctober 1976

Birmingham, Alahama

Not all R/UDAf missions are concemed withplanning and design issues of the physicalenvironment. The Birmingham study is primarilyaimed at creating a municipal planning process

which facilitates citizen participation at theneighborhood level. This emphasis on humanvalues in the decision-making process is anoutgrowth of the participatory planningmovement of the 1960s in American cities.

Gam members on the Birmingham study werecharged with helping to implement a recentlyestablished Citizens Participation Program, todemonstrate what enlightened neighborhoodparticipation can achieve, and specifically todevelop a neighborhood planning process as a

constituent element in the overall planningprogram for the city. Such a charge required thatthe team make an intensive analysis of one ormore neighborhoods in terrns of social andeconomic characteristics, develop anunderstanding of the way [oca[ decisions are made,

and comprehend the large-scale aspects of resourcemanagement for the City of Birmingham. It is a

very large task for a handful of people on a four-dayvisit to a city. The team repoft is one of thelongest and most detailed in the history of theR/UDAI process, and demonstrates the versatilityof the R/UDAI concept in responding to social as

well as physical issues.

At the time of the study, Birmingham, oftenreferred to as the "Pittsburgh of the South' " hadmore than fifty percent of its nonstreet acreagedevoted to steel production and fabricationindustries. Unemployment for the city as a wholewas well above the national average. There was

widespread povefty. Middle class families migratingto the suburbs left behind them a growingproportion of disadvantaged persons-the elderly,the pooq the under-and unemployed, andundereducated - thus increasing the burden ofsocial services while simultaneously shrinking thetax base. Retail and office space vacancy rErtes

reflected these trends. In one North Birminghamneighborhood center 60Vo of all retailspace was vacant.

A large number of social and environmental issues

confronted the R/UDAT team in 1976, the mostserious being that Birmingham did not possess themechanisms for incorporating neighborhood needsinto local govemmental decision-makingprocesses. Fortunately, race relations wererelatively stable and most of the organizationalinfrastructure was in place. Neighborhoodboundaries had been identified by citizens, andannual popular elections were held to elect three-

member Neighborhood Citizens Committee: In anascending hierarchy of leadership thesecommittees made up the membership of a series ofCommunity Citizens Committees whose residentswere members of a Citizens Advisory Board. Theproblem was that neighborhood programs becameentangled in a largely indirect, advisory procedurefor formulating plans. The basic mission of theR/UDAT team was to "design a process" foreffective neighborhood planning.

Alabama

212 The Birmingham R/UDAT team undertook itsmission with characteristic conceptual simplicityand directness. After analyzing the currentplanning process and recognizing its limitations, itlaid out a process in which the citizens MvisoryBoard had direct access to the mayor and council.In addition, the team recommended thattechnical resources be made available to theCommunity Citizens Committee, that a newdepartment of Economic and Social Developmentbe established within city govemment, and thatnew legal statutes be created to make quasi

independent boards and commissions more

accountable to the mayor. The combined effect ofthese recommendations is to strengthen themayor's office in relation to the planning function,and to bring the neighborhood's needs more

directly into the preparation of a plan throughdirect access of the Community Advisory Board tothe mayor and city council.

It has been noted previously that ceftain types ofdrawings are used to create conceptual frameworks:

Abstract diagrams of city and regional form,phasing diagrams, aerial perspectives, and aerial

relief plans. The Birmingham R/UDAT makes use

of the process diagram, a sort ofcomplex flow chart in which all the membersof a decision-making process are

organized acconCing to functional inter-relationships, sequence, hierarchy, and ability totransfer information. Considering the planning

background of many R/UDAT team members andthe general understanding of algorithms in therealm of architecture and city planning, it is notsurprising that the process diagram is called uponso often to chart a path through a decision-makingstructure. In the hands of the BirminghamR/UDAT team the process diagram becomes a

technique for creating an ordering system out ofwhich the recommendations grow. The clarity ofthese diagrams suggest that, as in previous

R/UDAT studies, drawing is used to define a

framework for team solutions rather than merely

act as a descriptive technique.

The following excerpts from the BirminghamR/UDAT repoft deal with the teamrecommendations conceming a neighborhoodplanning process and include some illustrations ofthe process applied to the North Birminghamsection of the city.

Birmingham R/UDAI Study. Birmingham,Alabama, October 1976. Gam members: StantonEckstut, AIA, Chairman; Charles P. Boyce; DonConway, AIA; John J. Desmond, EAIA; Julia Hall;Ronald B. Kull, AIA; Jack Pamick, AIA; RT,Schadelbach; Ron Shiffman.

Alabama

NUEEHEORI{OOD PLfqSSS$gh&g PROGESS

The City of Birmingham has launched one of themost significant experiments in the country inpopular neighborhood/community pafticipationand decision-making. Every residentialneighborhood within the City has beengeographically identified by its residents and apattem of responsible neighborhood participationhas been established that extends from eachneighborhood directly into the chambers of theMayor and the City Council. A regularized form ofannual popular elections has been established bywhich each neighborhood formally elects its civicleadership - a President, Vice-President and

Secretary of tis Neighborhood Citizens Committee(NCC).These three persons are in tum members

of a Community Citizens Committee (CCC) thatlooks after the collective interest of a number ofneighborhoods. The Presidents of these

committees in tum function on a city-wide level as

a Citizens Mvisory Board (CAB) that meets

regularly with the Mayor and City Council. CABreviews with these city officials programs forptoposed capital improvements, communitydevelopment and other planriing activities andserves as a direct, two-rvrr) conduit between thepolitical leadership and the residents of the city.This is a unique e><periment. If successful, it willhave far-reaching significance for Birmingham andother cities of America.

The impact of this form of direct pafticipatorydemocracy cannot be overestimated. The dramaticchanges that inevitably will occur in the politicalstructure and administration will have [ong.termimplications for Birmingham. The R/UDAI teambelieves that the outcome can only benefit thecitizens of Birmingham.

NeighborhoodOrganization

The PlanningProcess in

Birmingham

Development of the PlanThe separation of the physical planning process

from the political process of the city govemment is

evident in the way Birmingham now does itsplanning. Currently, the Birmingham PlanningCommission (BPC) receives advice through thepublic hearing process. The Planning Commissionin tum serves as an advisory agent to the Mayorand City Council. The principal link in thisrelationship is a land-use plan for the City whichthe BPC is charged to develop with staff assistancefrom the Department of Community Services. Anextremely important advisory element in thedevelopment of the physical plan is the CitizensAdvisory Board (CAB) which works closely withthe Planning Commission, the Mayor's office andthe City Council throughout development of theP[an. Appropriately enough, this process stafts atthe grassroots level, the eighty-four residentialneighborhoods of the City.

lmplementation of the PlanAs Chief Executive and administrative officer ofthe City, the Mayor is responsible for theimplementation of the City's land-use plan uponapproval of the Council. There are three elements

of local govemment that the Mayor has to dealwith in his efforts to implement the Plan. The firstof these comprises the departments of the CityGovemment over which the Mayor has bothadministrative and budgetary control. These are

such agencies as the Police Department,Inspection Services and Engineering. By virtue ofhis control, the Mayor can implement thoseportions of the Plan which relate to or are affected

by these departments. The second element of localgovernment with which the Mayor must deal are

the autonomous boards, commissions and

associations which derive their powers from theState rather than the City. The Mayor has little orno administrative contrcl over these agencies. Hehas, howeve! some limited leverage with these

units through the budgetary prccess. In addition,the Mayor is a working or fulI member of these

BoanCs. Of course, in actual practice and as long as

the day-to-day working relationship between theMayor and City Council and these Boards is

conCial, it is probable that the Mayor's opportunityto implement those portions of the City Plan

which relate to or are influenced by these boards is

satisfactory.

Birmingham, Alabama

2t6 The third element to consider is the JeffersonCounty Commission. The essential issue in thisrelationship is the contml of social and welfare

monies. Indeed, one of the the Commissioners is

titled the Commissioner of Welfare. Thus, those

portions of the Plan that contain physical

elements that are meant to facilitate social goals

and progmms are contingent upon theconcurrence of the Jefferson County Commissionwhich controls both welfare policies and monies.

BIRA lh$GmandS PLAhUN$IhUG FR@OEss : pRoLe(osE":E

Limitations and BecommendationsThere are a number of issues of the city's planningprocess as it currently exists. These stem primarilyfrom the limited capabilities of each of theneighborhoods to assess the nature and extent ofits needs and assets and the constraints placed onimplementatiorr powers of the Mayor. It is clear

that almost everyone involved in the developmentof the Community Panicipation PIan anticipatesthat it wi[[ serve as a device for bringing about

significant change. By-and-large, however, thechanges are thought of simply as physical - a sortof beautifucation prognrm with certain economicimplications. Certainly this is partially true. Whatdoes not seem to be quite so clear, however, are theprofound social consequences that result fromphysical changes once they are implemented. Thequaliry of life is powerfully affected by these

changes. Most importantly, however, the view ofthe plan as solely a beautification and economicinstrument inhibits one from seeing theopportunities it contains for exerting a positiveinfluence on the quality of life in all ofBirmingharrf s communities and neighborhoods.The recommendations of R/UDAI which followare intended to increase the potential of each

communiry within the city to recognize these

opportunities and implement them.

eJAS:8fitt*t&rye|cc:#fiEdDl

The elements of the ptoposal for strengtheningBirmingham's planning process derive from theCitizen Participation Plan (CPP). We view theneighborhood-community structure currentlydeveloping as the focal element around which theplanning process should revolve. Our intent is toimprove and e>rpand the planning capabilities ofthese neighborhood-community units in orrder

that they can perform in a competent mannerreflective of the needs and aspirations of theirresidents. It is important that the provision of CPP

which allows the Communiry CitizensCommittees to set up advisory councils should be

honored. Resource Councils to serve these

committees should consist of as many technicalresource persons or organizations as are needed toencourage the discovery and consideration ofoptions respecting the social and physical

environment. Thus, for example, a Pro-BonoPublico Law Group can become part of theResource Council of any of the CommunityCitizens Committees that feels it would benefitfrom this kind of expertise. In a similar way a

Community Design Center or a Vista volunteer ora public health physician can become a resource

for either a neighborhood or community citizens

committees. In addition, we urge the expansion ofthe Community Citizens Committee idea to allowit to include special interest groups from eachcommunity such as representatives of industrial orretail interests as advisors and full participants inthe planning effiorts of the CCC. The inclusion ofthese interests at the community level should be

actively sought. It should also be stressed that thestrengthening of the Citizens CommunityCommittees should not in any way lessen ordiminish the right of either an individual

neighborhood or a special interest whenever itfeels the need to do so. The intent here,however, is to have as much of thenegotiation/consensus/decision process as possible

occur at the community level. A final word is

appropriate here in regard to the community units.This is the implementation of the communityconcept by the various departments of the CityGovemment. Our recommendation is, whereverpossible, that all operating departments of theCity should reorient their service boundaries inorder to coincide with the boundaries of one ormore communities. Further, and to the extentpossible, the manpower, equipment and services

should be decentralized into the community orcommunities they serve. Obviously, scales ofeconomy must be recognized so that, for example,a police station might service two or threecommunities. Howeve! an important point is thatthis reorientation be along the lines of the nowrecognized communities.

Birmingham, Alabama

EIR AlN{Gm:lrinro"s Fl!-ANltN[tNG pRo@trss : NIlo\M

recommendation is for the activation of as large a

number and variety of communication mediums as

possible in order to keep residents currentlyinformed about all aspects and activities of theCPP network. Specifically, we urye theconsideration of community-oriented radioprograms, cable TV, newsletters, handbills, poster,

neighborhood bulletins and the like.

The second step we recommend to encourage

communication among community andneighborhood groups deals with the citizensMvisory Boarrd, the Mayor's office, the CityCouncil and the Planning Commission. While a

significant degree of interaction already occurs

among the CAB and the Mayor's office and CityCouncil, clearer, more intensive, two-way

communication should be occurring at thishighest level of decision-making. Al[ four offices

must actively participate in the give and take,

month-by-month negotiations necessary to give

birth to the plan's implementation procedures. Afurther recommendation entails the establishment

of a new agency within the City Govemment -the Department of Economic and SocialDevelopment (DESD).We view the present lack ofsuch a department as a significant void that needs

to be filled to provide for the constant monitoringevaluation and assessment of the economic and

social consequences of the City's plans. Thiseconomic and social'hccounting" function shouldbe carried out in parallel with a program ofeconomic and social development.

The next two steps in strengthening Birmingharrlsplanning process have to do with communications.Again we begin at the neighborhood level. Atpresent CPP encourages communication betweenthe Presidents of the Neighborhood CitizensCommittees and their residents. The actualmechanisms for the transmission of information at

this level are neither strcng nor welldefined. Our

DESD should be the sensing mechanism whichprovides information on the economic and social(or quality of life) effects of the City's plans as theirimplementation proceeds. In addition, DESDshould serve as a mechanism for furtherdeveloping and advocating B irmingham's

opportunities to the rest of the State and Nation.In this capacity, DESD should undertake a broad

range of economic development programs such as

industry incentives, manpower development and

so on. On the social side DESD programs aimed at

reducing alienation, providing social supportsnecessary to facilitate peoplds involvement in thesocial and economic life of the city and staftingin motion structural changes wouldmaximize opportunities for low income andparticularly young people.

The benefits of this dual assessment/developmentfunction can be tumed inward toward the city andoutwands towarC others. Thus, for example, in atime of diminishing resources the programs ofDESD can be focused inward to inform and re-

educate the working force in respect to thechanging economic conditions. Conversely, as thequality of life in Birmingham moves upward thisinformation can be directed outward to promotethe growth of the city.

RJUDAI's final recommendation for theimprovement and strengthening of Birminghant'splanning process has to do with the legislativeprogram for the Mayor's office. Specifically, we see

the need for changes in the present state

legislation which affect the relationships between

Mayor's office and the independent boads,commissions and associations and between theMayor's office and the County Commissioners.

We are not in a position to comment on the forces

and legal principals which have led to the existinglaws goveming these relationships. We are,

however, acutely aware of the impediments andconstraints imposed on the Mayor's office and theCiry Council in their efforts to implement theirplans. In both the development phase andimplementation phases of the planning process,

current state legislation hinders all parties in theirefforts to serve their constituents. In addition,present statutes leave the Mayor, the CountyCommissionets and the local boards and

commissions without resource for eitherarbitration or redress of grievances.

Alabama

220 In view of these conditions we recommend thatthe Mayor and City Council take whatever legalinitiatives are appropriate to change the existingstatutes for the purpose of insuring a greater degreeof accountability and responsiveness by theindependent and quasi-independent boards,

commissions and associations of the citygovemment and the County Board ofcommissioners to the plans and programs

of the city.

The technique utilized here is to demonstrate themanner in which land uses and physicalimprovements diagramatically shown in the plancan be implemented. Within each community,there exist special conditions that requirestabilization and/or change. Because of these

special conditions, certain implementationtechniques will be discussed.

In general, these plans are designed to increase

home ownership, provide means of stabilizinghome ownenhip and increase housing. In supportof housing, pedestrian and vehicular circulationwould reinforce the inter-relationship with otherresidential sections and support facilities such as

parks and recreation and shopping.

Nr-rarlMaking the Process

Work CIE'5HLDt*.uNebaa5

NLqLaf ao lof 3 16<d4utfy lo (,N,ruTeEesT dtTtEElt,Ry,@ *oLN

lar-r-e--'-ilruT ZeEillSEECnVEL{ Zltliftrls a vrD

4LDUb latt'

In terms of commercial development, the intent is

to consolidate through the recycling of adjacentpropefty and improved circulation. Additionalparking may be necessary to reinforce thecommercial improvements. Signcontrols, etc. would be used to supportthe neighborhood characteristics.

Utilization of existing undeveloped land would be

enhanced through the introduction of new stornand sanitary sewers, construction of drainageditches and grade separated crossings.

The basic premises discussed here are

demonstrated in each community.

Birmingham, Alabama

'!+.- _ffi

NORTH BIRN4INGHAMtr

North Birmingham Acipco . . . Hooper City . . . Collegeville . . .

Pleasantview . . . reflect the suppressed energy ofits residents. Heavily burdened with the visual

blight of the U.S. Pipe Company and cut into a

patchwork quilt of isolated pockets by railroad

tracks and superslabs, North Birmingham is a

community desirous of preserving, rebuilding and

re-establishing its identiry.

The struggle of each neighborhood to survive and

to create a stable environment for its residents isreflected in attempts at rejuvenation of the maincommercial street. The decline of the 275th Street

strip is a reflection of the limited opportunities ofthe poor neighbors residing in adjoining areas.

The poverty, joblessness, and lack of identity,coupled with the desire to overcome these

problems, is the driving force that is everywhere inevidence.

The commercial rejuvenation of the 27th St.shopping center is integrally linked to themaintenance, preservation and growth of theadjoining neighborhoods.

Inherent in the plan for rejuvenation is theprincipal expressed at the town hallmeeting - "Bring the People Backl'Given thegrowth of regional shopping centers in areas

previously served by North Birmingham, the onlyway 27th St. can be revitalized is by bringing thepeople back. Therefore, we suggest that low-rise

housing be built on vacant land adjoining 27thStreet. In addition, services, quality merchandise,

safe streets and new merchants with roots in thecommunity must also be "Brought Backl'

Road systems must also be rationalized; access

improved; hazar,Js removed; noise controlled, andservices, particularly for very old and veryyoung, established.

Specifically the suggestions include:oExtension of 20th Avenue N.E. to Collegeville

along the southem edge of Collegeville.oProvision of vehicular access to Collegeville via

grade separation crossings of 33rd and35th Avenue N.

r Diversion of 30th Ave. to 29th Ave. near thebusiness center in order to restrictcommercial expansion.

o Provision of general road and

street improvements.o Improvement of the sewer system in Collegeville.rConstruction of bike paths.oDevelopment of neighborhood based home

improvement progarrns.o Establishment of a community-based development

corporation that could undertake developmentactivities within the community's business center.

o Provision of housing for the elderly adjacent to theshopping center.

r Construction of several new housing complexes.oEstablishment of new industry North and !7est of

26th Ave.

!LElmrrrff Irli i

Alabama

H ea lds bu rg, Califo rnia

\r/ -/-hA

v*J ,r\

226 Small Town in theWine Region

October 1982

Healdsbu rg, California

Healdsburg is a town of approximately 7000persons in the Sonoma Valley region of Califomia.Known for its vineyards, Sonoma Valley runs

almost due north of San Francisco through an area

possessing rich alluvial soils and a climate that is

conducive to wine-making.

The town functions as an agricultural service

center. Tourists pass up and down the valley

visiting wineries, but no effort has been made to

capture the commercial potential of this activity.Santa Rosa to the south is a rapidly growing

community with a diversified commercial retailsystem which attracts shoppers from Healdsburg.

Some of Santa Rosa's explosive growth is creatingdemands for housing in Healdsburg, and the townis caught in an economic squeeze between loss

of trade to Santa Rosa and costs ofexpansion to accommodate residents who workin another town.

A11 indicators point towards continued futuregrowth in Healdsburg, yet there are constraintswhich have forced the town into a compact urbanform within the valley configuration. Russian

Riveq origin of the rich soil of the valley, acts as a

barrier to the eastem extension of utilities, whileFitch Mountain is part of a ridge line which blocksexpansion to the northeast. The flood plains ofRussian Riveq Foss Creek and Dry Creek have

limited growth to the south and west ofHealdsburg. Finally, Highway 101 acts as a westemlimit to expansion except at interchanges. A less

obvious constraint to growth is the existence of amajor fault zone on the eastem edge of the valley.Finally, if aquifer recharge zones should become

depleted as a consequence of increased waterdemands caused by urban expansion, the potentialfor earthquakes would increase.

In view of these environmental constraints, theR/UDAT team visiting Healdsburg in October1982 had to develop a plan for growth and change.

It recognized Santa Rosa to the south as a regional

commercial center and major employer in theservice sector while capitalizing, at the same time,on the resources of Healdsburg's position inSonoma Valley. Three development scenarios were

considered: A continuation of current pattems ofgrowth in which Healdsburg acted as a dormitorysuburb for Santa Rosa and continued to functionas an agricultural service center; a Silicon Valleypattem of growth based on research industry; and

a "destination tourist" strategy for organizing

vineyards and other local attractions into a

network of tourist features.

It is characteristic of the R/UDAT process to state

its concepts with great simplicity. The bedroom

community scenario was pictured withconsummate ski[ as a growth strategy which could

only drain [oca[ sates away from Healdsburg whilesimultaneously raising the demand for new public

services. The vision of shrinking local sales

receipts accompanied by increased costs forinfrastructure, schools, sewage facilities, housing,public safety services, hospital beds and healthfacilities was advanced along with specific

quantities of space, land and square footage ofbuildings. A similar argument was made against

industrial expansion in the high-tech sector, withadded emphasis on the potential destruction ofenvironmentally sensitive agricultural lands withinthe river valley ecosystem.

Healdsburg,

228 Recognizing the fact that tourism brings tradewithout increasing the residential population, theR/UDAI team opted for the third developmentscenario: '[b utilize Healdsburg as a destinationpoint for tourism, with the chief thrust being theorganization of 57 local wineries into a system oftours. This development strategy would serve tocoordinate curent laissez faire pattems of tourism,to provide the basis for imprcvements in thedowntown area, and to focus activity in the retailand professional service sectors of the economicstructure of the city. Specifically, the team's

recommendations stated that Healdsburg shouldprcmote a minimum two-day loop tour of bothva[[ey's wineries - Sonoma Valley and nearbyNapa Valley - through the San Francisco JburistOffice and the County Wine-growers' Association.It was envisioned that this approach would makethe town a logical place for at least an ovemightstay, and as a consequence create a market forhotel space and related retail sales. A variety ofcomplementary tourist attractions already centeredin Healdsburg could then be drawn into the touristindustry: Russian River recreational activities, LakeSonoma, historic housing, and the Plaza as a

downtown focal point.

,\flclt t"f!

Lra-rt

2 DAY WINE T@UR

,t.i!tu

Downtown Healdsburg is seen in the RJUDATreport as an area of mixed-use development:Commercial, recreational, residential and tourist.The Plaza, a three-sided central square, is to bereinforced by arcades, outdoor cafes andcommercial activities catering to a variety ofincome levels. A hotel is to be constructed across

Vine Street and connected to the Plaza by a publicpassage. Other features to the west such as a bus,rail and auto transportation inter-change and anew Hispanic Cultural Center are seen as

strengthening the role of downtown. The goal is tobring a winery-oriented tourist populationtogether with a varied group of residentsinto a mutually rewarding social andcommercial atmosphere.

An underlying optimism and purposefulness isrevealed in these R/UDAT recommendations. Thescenarios are described as if they had happened,and the measures for achieving them are statedwith conviction. From sma[ town to metropolis,R/UDAT defines issues and applies its conceptswith characteristic simplicity.

Healdsburg R/UDAT Study October 8-1L,1987,Healdsburg, Califomia. Team members: R.Te.rvSchnadelbach, ASLA, Team Chairman; VilliamLamont, Jr., AICP; Emie Niemi; David Stea; MiloH. Thompson, AIA; Baymond Tiujillo, AIA;Ronald A. Straka, FAIA.

7:1)'i:dd

H ea ldsbu rg, C a I iforn ia

230 EconomicRecommendations

Healdsburg's public services currently are adequate

to support a sound economy, but their status in thefuture is uncertain. The City's utilities -electricity, water, and sewer - support theiroperating costs through the collection of fees.

Other services, though, depend on the general

fund and, given Califomia's current financialstructure, the city has little ability to control itsrevenues directly to meet service requirements. Itessentially has no ability to raise propefty taxrevenues, the conventional source of funding forlocal public services in the U.S. Other majorsources of funding, such as intergovemmentaltransfers also are beyond the City's control.General obligation bonds, the borrowing of money

for major capital expenditures, are also essentially

a thing of the past.

But through its economicdevelopment strategy,

Healdsburg can indirectly hold and even broaden

its resource-base for its public services. The key is

the sales tax. Currently, the tax on retail sales

contribute more than one-half (607o) of theGeneral Fund. About one-third of the sales-tax

receipts come from a single source: Boise Cascade's

sales to contractors. Such dependency on a single

source of revenue undermines the security of theCity and its vital public services - particularlythose services that can't fund themselves, such as

parks and recreation, public safety, humanservices, cultural programs, streets and bike paths.

By adopting a strategy emphasizing thecommercial mther than the industrial sectoE theCity can mitigate this vulnerability. Thus, ourrecommendation to pursue tourism-orientedcommercial development not only takes advantageof national and regional economic forces, but italso enhances the City's ability to provide thenecessary local support for services.

There are some remaining economic concems,

though. One is that the City should not tum itsback on industry. Specifically, it should notunreasonably interfere with the industrial firmsalready here, but should retain adequate

industriallyzoned land to support futureexpansion. [oca[ firms that need to expand orrelocate, such as E&M Electric, need to be able tofind space.

AIso, the City should avoid unnecessary

subsidization for growth. Healdsburg's economy is

basically strong and is likely to become even

stronger. Rather than follow the course ofdistressed communities which use subsidies toencourage growth, Healdsburg should de-

emphasize such actions and, instead, use its

resources to promote other, non-economic, aspects

of the area's quality of life.

Focusing theCommercial Sector

In developing its commercial sector, the city mustrecognize that the sector has two majorcomponents. One provides retail and professionalservices to residents of the City. The other servicestourists. Our recommendations attempt to bolsterboth components by strengthening eachindividually, and by encouraging them to reinforceone another.

Local Retail and SeruicesThe size, needs and the nature of the local-servicecommercial sector stem primarily from the size ofthe community. A city the size of Healdsburgembodies too small a market to support either a

large number of similar shops or a wide offering ofgoods and services. Hence, in this and similarcommunities, the commercial sector feasibly canprovide only the retail and professional servicesthat represent a fairly high percentage ofhousehold expenditures. These include, forexample, both the retailing of groceries, drugs, andgeneral merchandise, as well as the provision ofhealth-care, insurance, banking and other services.Comparison shopping such as clothing or fumitureare much more limited due to the market size.

Variety, sizes and fashions are apt to be limitedwith a smallmarket to serve. Inventory bynecessity, is also restricted.

Expansion of the City by even 10,000 people willnot alter this picture appreciably.

Our recommendations for local retail developmentin Healdsburg originate within this context. Theytreat the proposed shopping center on Mill Streetprimarily as a local-retail center, with a grocerystore and a major drug store as major tenants; thecenter will draw its clientele mainly from the Cityand the surrounding area.

Healdsburg,

In addition, our recommendations anticipate thatthe new center will become a major new focus oflocal-service retailing in the City. Currently, thedowntown focus is not the Plaza, as many peopleperceive, but the two small shopping centers twoto three blocks nofth of the Plaza, with J.C.Penney and Sprouse-Reitz/S#eway respectively as

major tenants. The Mill Street Centet though,with the area's largest grocery and drug stores,

likely will become the new focus for localshopping.

In the process, this new area will draw some tradeaway from the existing centers. The Mitchellcenter seems most susceptible because of itsconstricted parking. The existing Safeway/Sprouse

Rietz center enjoys better access and, assuming

that a replacement for Safeway is found, this area

should remain quite viable.

To reinforce all the centers, our recommendationsemphasize the development of a new roadconnecting Mill Street and the new center withthe intersection of Piper Street and HealdsburgAvenue. The new road will give all centers good

access and will avoid increasing traffic conflictsaround the Plaza.

The new center will have little impact oncommercial enterprises elsewhere in the City. Thisincludes the Plaza. Firms in the Plaza constitutevery little of the City's local-service retailingcapacity. Hence, the new center should draw littletrade from these stores. The concentration ofprofessional service firms around Healdsburg,Center and East Avenues is likely to remainrelatively unaffected.

Tourist SeruiceCenters

Our recommendations for commercialdevelopment elsewhere in the City focus ontourism. Here again, the guiding principle is thatthe nature of the development must match thenature of the market. Since Healdsburg willcontinue to see growth among two distinct groupsof tourists, we commend two distinct responses.

One addresses tourists oriented to the wineindustry. This group generally is quite affluent, is

sensitive to aesthetics, and will increase their tradewith Healdsburg's commercial sector only if thesector constructs an identity built aroundrelationships with the wine industry. This groupalso is likely to trade more with a commercialcenter oriented toward pedestrian rather thanautomobile traffic.

\7e recommend the City encourage commercialdevelopment in and near the Plaza to respond tothis tourist market. The City and local merchantsshould develop a common theme here and orientthe area toward the wine country tourist. The areashould emphasize retail firms, accommodations,and restaurants, rather than local professional orconvenience stores. Development of the westsideof the Plaza should occur only if it enhances theability of the entire area near the Plaza to servethis market. The City should give preference to a

first-class hotel/restaurant complex on thewestside. Finally, the City should alter thecharacter of Healdsburg Avenue between Mill andPiper Streets to ensure that it serves as a corridorleading people into the Plaza.

For other tourists, the City's commercialdevelopment must have an entirely different flavor,and a separate location. Highway-orientedtravelers, especially those headed to and from LakeSonoma, increasingly will demand highway-oriented goods and services at the Dry Creek Roadinterchange with U.S. 101. This is the main entrypoint to Lake Sonoma from the south. The Cityshould thus respond accordingly.

The City should encourage commercialdevelopment east of U.S. 101 that includesmotel(s), gasoline stations, automotive/marineservices, boat storage, fast-food restaurants, and theIike. In essence, the City should encourage acommercial node on the east side of theinterchange to serve and capitalize on theanticipated growth of traffic headed towardLake Sonoma.

Healdsburg,

'zg4 New ElementsDowntown

The Plaza: OtherBuilt Environment

Cansiderations

In the future, "Downtown" is the area immediately

surrounding the Plaza, west of East Street, south ofGrant Street, and north and east of the

Northwestem Pacific Railroad tracks. It is

envisioned as an area of mixed use: Mixed

commercial, mixed recreational, mixed residentialland, tourist activities. The Plaza is reinforced by

arcades, outdoor cafes, and commercial activities

catering to a variety of income levels. Across VineStreet (formerly Healdsburg Avenue) is a hotel

connected by a public passage to the Plaza

and other features to the west, including therail, and auto transportation interchange and a

new Hispanic Cultural Center. The "new"(reorganized) downtown will bring a winery-

oriented tourist population together with a varied

group of residents in a mutually rewarding social

and commercial atmosphere.

The Plaza area design encourages the addition of a

new hotel and several bed-and-breakfastestablishments. The recently bumed building,with rehabilitation, becomes an outdoor cafe

providing a public passage from a parking lot tothe plaza, oriented along an axis to the passage

through the new hotel restaurant complex to thewest. The vacant comer opposite City Hallbecomes a shop with a rooftop restaurant. A new

sidewalk design, fronting a[[ buildings,incorporates a line of centennial palm trees adding

another concentric ring of green to the plaza

complex. A pedestrian connector runs from theplaza to the current Mil[ Street Shopping Center.

This occupies an existing open corridor.

A major change in the traffic pattern is therouting of heavy trucks to the west of the theNorthwestem Pacific Railroad tracks, retuming toits old path on Piper Street, thus bordering abroader special downtown precinct, including new

shops with a tourist orientation. This street ties

into the proposed new street in the Mill Streetshopping center. Reducing traffic on what was

formerly Healdsburg Avenue permits increased

parking for tourists through a perpendicularparking pattem. At each end of the street is a

ceremonial gateway.

\-,4#..'

As part of its effiorts to implemenr theserecommendations, the City must define andimplement various design guidelines for the plazaand surrounding area. Then it must exercise itspower for design review to enforce theseguidelines. The guidelines must cover the criteriaof the design proposal to ensure that the overallconcept becomes manifest.

Plaza District GuidelinesThese characteristics include, but are notlimited to:1. Connection between the Plaza and other areas;2. Continuity of pedestrian street level activities;3. Controlled height of buildings;4. Orientation of buildings to the Plaza;5. Distinguishing the difference between new

buildings on the westside and the existingPlaza; and

6. The overall character of the Plaza.

Healdsburg is a delightful city in a delightful area.It has natural and man-made attractions. It has agood location - one hour to the ocean and twohours to a major city. It has an interested, activepopulation, strong political leadership, a strongstaff who is very capable of dealing with itsproblenrs and opportunities. The information,reports and feedback from elected officials, staff,and citizens during the RUDAf processdemonstrated that the ideas and the capacity toaccomplish things are here. What can be done tostrengthen this?

H ea ldsb u rg, C a I iforn ia

l. Keep the FaithDorit become too anxious. Growth is coming tothis area. Set the standards and guidelines fordevelopment high. Don't let marginal orunattractive past development set the standard forthe future. Don't compound financial burdens.

For example, sewer and water hook-up charges are

not paying for the plant capacity people use. Thatmeans the whole population will have to pay forfurther expansion. Have growth pay its own way.

Set plant hook-up charges equal to the costs newusers impose on the system, probably $1,000 to

$1,200, for sewer instead of the $200 fee presentlycharged. If you don't, everyone willpay higherfuture user rates charges and subsidize growth. Putthe lid on items you consider problems and have

all new development meet your new standards.

Don t get anxious and give away the store

to get growth.

IEJrIE<T*ALDf#.alELetElflr,r.1E

'lr"maq?r*- t111 11461 gl at-ruG!lr7.r€ Lst rrlcr., Uftrrrf!.kcul- 4'r a}EH. BE

I5B Uf,!

2. TimingThe economy, as everyone knows, is bad. Moneyrates are high, construction is down. This too shallpass (we hope). Development of an area such as

the Plaza \Uest project takes time. Downtownmalls, in most cities, have taken LZ-15 years toimplement from the time the idea gains credibility.There are laws to be passed, parking to be created,designs to be finalized, financing to be obtained,utilities to be moved. [t will not happen ina year or two.

lt helps to have a flow chart of what needs to be

done, and not forget little things, for theyfrequently take the most time. Post the flow chartwhere it will be a constant reminder and keep itup-to-date. Set benchmarks so you know you are

making progress. Be flexible and be prepared toadjust, but keep the central concept in mind anddo not get frustrated by required adjustments.Maybe the "fountain" does not get built or somepet element gets dropped. Changes are inevitable.The plan is only the beginning. It's theimplementation that takes the work and the time.Be prepared for the long haul and you will be less

easily discouraged.

,',.ter^ftOl3lCrr',|-LefiEr,tT=

rD, arr-i ucatD

.U ALH'

u"D'o'ruL'

Z.+.::,.-.';:-."*,1'z:i.

H ealdsbu rg, Ca I iforn ia

Olympia, Washington

\-s-\.

ffi?rftrT{,

240 /ssues of a SmallCapital City April

Olympia, Washington

State capitols are a special kind of urban designproblem. Govemment expansion and officebuilding utilization policies are rarely coordinatedwith the host city planning agency, and as a resultan uneasy relationship may exist between the townand the state govemment. Since the old statecapitol buildings are located near, if not at theactual center of the downtown area, there are a

number recurring design issues: Excessive ground-level parking space devoted exclusively togovemment employees; periodic large scale swingsfrom full to paftial occupancy in office buildings as

govemment programs change; little after hoursactivity in downtown streets; and a "grey" area ofdeterioration surrounding the govemmentcomplex, often in residential areas possessing

historically significant homes.

Olympia typifies the unique design challengeposed by state capitols. Situated at thesouthemmost end of Puget Sound in the state ofWashington, Olympia has a population ofapproximately 45,000 and is both state capitol andseat of Thurston county. Three local cities -Tirmwater, Lacey and Olympia comprise a smallurban region of over 100,000 people. Stategovemment employs 17.,5W persons. If theeconomic multiplier effect is taken into account,govemment employment clearly is the majoreconomic base component.

*-\. ,6urqen .,-

ir\t\\ tr -I -

*V-*'-J

Olympia, Washington

The old state capitol building is located near thecenter of the downtown among a rectilinear grid ofstreets and buildings. A uraterfront, once utilizedas a canning and logging center, flanks two sides ofthe downtown area.

N 75r \07hen the R/UDAI team visited Olympia in April1979 they quickly grasped the basic design issues

and realized the significance of the waterfront as

an element in a development strategy. Settingsights on a ten-year development program aimed at

a centennial celebration in 1989, the R/UDAfteam skillfully blended the ordering system of thegrid, the potential of the waterfront as a scenicand recreational area, and the presence of the stategovemment into a ptan for the downtown area.

There are definite landmarks in the evolution ofthe RIUDAT process. The Denver mission in 1976

clearly demonstrated the power of graphic

visualization techniques to render a complex set ofissues comprehensible to the participants. TheOlympia study carries the evolution one step

further by bringing both the overall concept andits component parts up to the same level ofadvanced conceptual development: Scale, mass

and aesthestic character is defined, andarchitectural form is implied rather than detailed.

There is a technical virtuosity about the study

which is conveyed through both the eloquentgraphic depictions of development actions and its

suppofting text.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Washington

PEOESTBIAN IMPFOVEMENTS ON,lth STREfi

The crucial step in the organization of sepamtep[anning issues into a development frameworkoccurred when a three-phase strategy was devised.These simple line diagrams reveal basic land andwaterforms, major infrastructural elements andcritical components in the process of knitting anurban fabric into some kind of uniry. Phase 1

shows the creation of a "thematic" waterfrontretail center and a tree-lined pedestrian linkbetween the center and the existing town. Phase 2

extends the pedestrian link linearly between thestate capitol and the waterfront to give a visualemphasis to marine activity. Cross links areestablished along major commercial streets, and a

cultural center is used as a magnet to generateactivity at the southem end of the pedestrian link.Finally, in Phase 3, office buildings reinforce thepedestrian link which now extend all the way tothe end of the peninsula upon which thedowntown area sits. Marina facilities and housingare used in this phase to reinforce the conceptualstrucrure established in Phase 1 and elaborated insuccessive phases.

-S(7\?l--.-1.- )',

it,\-/ar-

Observations have already been made about thepower of drawings to act as structural frameworksfor design and planning decisions. In allprobability the three-phase drawing of theOlympia was the catalyst which inspired anexpression of ideas for individual actions.

Elements of the existing urban landscape were

selected and combined with ideas for new facilitiesinto a set of comprehensive and coherent linediagrams. These conceptual statements were thenexecuted in the detailed form in a "developmentplan" in which building masses, landscapefeatures, and specific facilities were given a

concrete imagery.

PERFORMING ARTS CENTER

As stated previously, the imagery yields a sense of

scale, mass and aesthetic character, but stops short

of making a commitment to architectural form. Inthe pages of the repoft following the phasing

diagrams and the development plan, several

individual projects were drawn and described ingreater detail: Performing Arts Center, CapitolWay-Eighth Street Development, marina and

housing complex, office development and capitollake office complex.

Washington

JILtll_

Ir_ll-llCAPITOL LAKE DEVELOPMENT

Aerial relief plans, also known as shadow plans, are

the type of drawings most often chosen to create

detailed development frameworks. Landscape

features, such as rows of trees or paved plazas, can

be suggested with relatively little linework. In the

same manner, shadows cast by plan forms can be

used to create a sense of "visual mass" withoutbecoming involved in building function or plan

configuration. Neveftheless, it is necessary todifferentiate between building types so that the

scale of residential development is clearly

distinguishable from that o( say, office buildings.Urban designers must understand thedeterminants of architectural form even if theextemal environment is as far as the concept ofurban form is to be executed in a R/UDAI study.

This special ability to rapidly oryanize three'

dimensional concepts and execute them in aconvincing manner is the mainstay of all R/UDATmissions. In the case of the Olympia study, it isperformed with skill and eloquence.

Before the team arrived in Olympia there was a

good collection of parts and players but nostructural framework. This R/UDAf, helpedaddress the need for priorities and a plan. It dealtwith the development of special activities, mixeduses, housing, the development of Olympia'sphysical appearance, a growth policy, and

management plan.

At the time of the Olympia R/UDAI the localsteering committee established a corporation tocarry out the recommendations of the team. Thatcorporation has been active ever since and is stillchipping away on the issues of urban developmentin Olympia.

Olympia R/UDAT Study. April 19-73, 1979,

Olympia, Washington, Gam members: CharlesRedmon, AIA, Chairman; Shirley Bramhall;Daniel R. Mandelker; Dean K. Hunt; Peter

Hasselman, AIA; Bemard P. Spring, FAIA; JohnK. Haeseler; Summer Myers; Charles A. Blessing,EAIA/AIP

Context Olympia, the state capital of Washington, lies atthe center of business and governmental activityin the Pacific Northwest. Located at the southemtip of Puget Sound, the Capital City area is a

developing three-ciry community consisting oflacey, Olympia, and Jirmwater. Olympia is theseat of govemment for Thurston County. It is

strategically located as a major transpoftationcrossroads between rail, air, wate! and highwayservices giving the area the forward momentumthat characterizes a progressive city.

Several themes in Olympia's history continue intothe present. Olympia's relationship today with itsneighbors, with its own neighborhoods, and withthe State are a result of historic events.

For instance, Olympia's relationship withTirmwater can be traced back to 1847 when a trailwas made to link Smithfield (Olympia) with NewMarket (Tirmwater). After the founding ofThurston County (1852) and the arrival of the new

territorial govemor, Stevens (1853), Olympiabecame the govemment seat.

Olympia was incorporated in January 1859 and in1889 Olympia was named the State Capital.Iegislation in 1954 requiring all State offices tolocate in Olympia further confirmed Olympiasunique identity as a govemmental seat.

Geography and historic decisions on constructionalso have played a major role in determiningOympia's present situation.

Washington

28 The decision by Edward Giddings to build a wharfat the foot of Main Street (now Capitol Boulevard)

contributed to the location of the east-west

corridor. Events like these establish the land use

pattem which to some degree still determines

future land use in the ciry. Not until 1868 uxas a

bridge to the Westside built. large prcperty

ownerships kept the area in a relativelyundeveloped state until after \Uorld War II.

The discrepancy between the reality of Olympiaand its idealistic name helps identifu theunrealized potential of the city. The slow growthwhich has been a factor in the region has helpedpreserve this potential. The discovery of gold inCalifomia (1848) and the decision to locate theraihoad terminus in Thcoma (1873) are two of themole important historic events which have

contributed to a slow rate of growth in Olympiauntil the present. The cenffalization of Stateoffices in the town and the creation of TheEvergreen State College along with statewidegrowth have contributed recently to an increase ingrowth pressures.

The population of Olympia's three-city area was

38,400 in 1970 while the population of ThurstonCounty in that year was 76,900. By 1979 thepopulation of the Olympia area had risen by about13%, while Thurston County showed more than a

30% increase to 101,000.

Statistics for Thurston County and its threeprincipal cities of lacey, Tirmwater and Olympiareveal that growth has already exceeded forecasts

made as late as December,1977. These forecasts

indicate that the population of Thurston Countymay double by the year 2000.

Downtown Activities The Downtown: Concentrating on the BastActivities to Spark Futurc GrowthThe secret to making Downtown Olympia a place

where people will want to come and where theycan both conduct business and enjoy themselvesis twofold:

l)Having the right kind of activities in thedowntown, and

2)Creating an attractive physical framework forthese activities.

This section of the R/UDAI report identifies theactivities which the team sees as the principalopportunities to make downtown an e:<citing anduseful destination. Recommendations on thephysical framework for the downtown that canhouse these activities and further enhance themare set forth in the succeeding section.

Prcsent Downtown StrcngthsActivities which currently exhibit strength in thedowntown and serve to attract people there forpuposes other than workday business includethe following:

oTwo major hotel/motels, one of which is located

on the principal square..A large number of banks and savings institutions.oEstablished specialty retail stores, which remain

strong in certain locations, particularly CapitolWay south of Fourth Street.

rNew retail stores and restaurants, several of whichhave been started by young entrcpreneurs. Anumber of these are concentrated on Fourth Streetbetween Water Street and Columbia Street.

oThree movie houses, one of which has been

converted to a multi-cinema with three screens.oThe Yard Birds Sea Mart, a very large discount

type store located in two former cannery buildingson the nofthern edge of downtown. This store

draws a wide variety of shoppers into Olympiafrom considerable distances.

o Marine operations and waterfront parks along thedourntown's westem waterfront. The parks appear

to be under-utilized at present, but offer a majoramenity due, in paft, to the views across the water

and the boating activities near\

It is fortunate that these strong existing activitiesare principally concentrated within the space of afew blocks and can, therefore, be supplemented by

rather modest projects in the same general area tomake the downtowrr a stronger magnetfor visitors.

Washington

l ruo Over the longer range, a numbet of new activitiesshould be created in the downtown to make it anexciting place to visit and to provide a wideenough range of activities to keep peoplepleasantly occupied. These recommended newuses have been selected based on 1) their ability tofit in with the existing strengths of the downtown,2) provide activities that are not duplicatedelsewhere in the region, and 3) emphasizingactivities that are capable of attracting people,particularly for shopping, dining and recreation.

The activities recommended to be added orenhanced are outlined below and described morecompletely later in this repoft. Th.y include:

o Continuation of waterfront development forexpansion of boating activity and as a setting foradjacent shopping, dining and recreation.

rCommercial revialization with emphasis onspecialty shopping, handicrafts, food andentertainment.

oRecreational attractions, including both free andcommercial facilities and possibly additionalfest ivals prognamming.

rOffice space of a type and scale that fits in wellwith the rest of downtown Olympia andits setting.

oHousing for special target markets includingsingles and the elderly.

oHistotic preservation and adaptive reuse ofdowntown buildings which are significantaesthetically or historically and which, inthemselves, might constitute a minor visitorattraction with proper interpretive programming.

Some possible projects that can be carried outwithin each of these categories are identifiedbelow, and further possibilities should be generated

by the community.

The priority projects which the R/UDAf teamfeels should be implemented initially are identifiedin the section on phasing.

Watertront DevelopmentThe city has already made significant strides inimproving the waterfront so that it can be enjoyedby pedestrians as well as by boat users. Downtownprojects completed to date include Capitol Lake

Park and Percival Landing. A major marina projectfor the East Bay is expected to be approved soon.

Next steps should include:

oExtending the waterfront improvementsnorthwar,Cs from Percival Landing.

o Keeping a'working waterfront' while permittingpedestrian access, good vantage points andprotecting sight lines across the water from thewest side of downtown.

r Including maritime attractions such as ships whichcan be visited alongside.

r Integrating waterfront development with themedspecialty retail and recreational uses immediatelyadjacent. This concept is referred to in thediscussion of commercial revitalization later inthis report.

t ltrl7r; ,/#- (r'

Olympia, Washington

252 A Technique for Bringing about Revitalizationof the Commercial CorcThe merchants and the public sector need to worktogether closely to bring about immediate modestimprovements and long-term larger changes to theretail area.

The merchants should form a Local DevelopmentCorporation ODC) to help them get favonable

loans through the Small Business Administrationfor rehabilitation and improvements. As an LDCthey can carry on a number of co-operativeactivities that will improve the appearance of thearea and over time improve business volumes.

rA unified design plan for improving buildingexteriors and controlling signs.

o Preparation of special events such as downtownprcmotions at certain times, street fairs, sidewalksales, dinner and restaurant guides, dinner/moviespecials, craft demonstrations, walking tours ofhistoric structures and unusual shops.

.A plan for shared parking and ultimatelyadditional parking.

oA search for new businesses to fill vacant spaces ormeet special needs.

oAssistance to existing businesses requiring space

for expansion.o A series of experiments with evening and weekend

openings in co-operation with the transitauthority and the neighborhood oryanizations.

The public sector needs to continue to offerassistance in the following ways:

r Negotiating a transit system from the statecampus, possibly using a fun-type vehicle such as a

trolley or closed zoo tnain, or a regular bus..Getting free transit for evening and weekend

openings and special eventsrPreparation of grant applications for Small

Business Administration programs.

The revitalization of the downtown business areawill benefit the entite region and everyone shouldparticipate. Since the area will not be competingwith the malls, all levels of govemment andresidents from all parts of the county can beencouraged to visit, enjoy and support the newdowntown Olympia. To bring this about themerchants should seriously consider hiring a full-time staffperson to work with a staffpersonassigned by the City of Olympia.

PhasingThe R/UDAPs far-reaching recommendations forthe transformation of downtown Olympia maytake between ten and twenty years to accomplishin full. The overall design concepts were developedwith realistic opportunities for phasing in mind.As the population of the region and the State'sadministrative functions grow over the comingyears the economy will grow as well. This shouldattract a steady stream of investment into thedowntown area.

'f,-z\1a*\V}:Z

25;-.-;q

qr_Y>^ -.. 1i?---, ->-J :

/k,"L;.- " '*-

\- 2-<e7i>)<+.7\ -\*'V-)+ \'

\ <- -s\"

k;;,q}>x<."-.\)(--)itr}dral}(< '.-..*<r, .,

Olympia, Washington

Appendix: ChronologV of R/UDATs 1967-1985

,Rapid City, South Dakota10-12 Junc 1967

Chairperson:Roben S. Sturgis, AlA,Architect/UrbanDe s i g n e r / A rc h i te ct u ra IEducator,Cambridge, MA

Team Members:Dean L. Gustavson, FAIA,Architect,Salt Lake City, UTJames A. Hatcher, AIA/AIP,Arch itect / U rba n Pl a nner,Little Rock, ABThomas H. Hodne, AIA/AIP,Arc h itect / U rba n Des i g n er,Minneapolis, MN

Population approx. 30,OOO.

Visit requested by Chamber ofCommerce with AIA support.Problem of disorganizedbusiness district.

2Frunkfort, Kentucky1l-14 November 1967

Chairperson:Robert S. Sturgis, AlA,Architect/UrbanD e s i g n e r / Arc h i tec t u ra IEducator,Cambridge, MA

Team Member;Edward R. Hoermann, AlP,Urban Pla nner/ Plann i ngEducator,Cincinnati, OH

Population approx. 20,0OO.Visit requested by EastKentucky Chapter/AlA.Problem of decliningbusiness district.

3Flint,Michigan19-21 Octoher 1968

Chairperson:Robert S. Sturgis, AlA,Architect/UrbanD esi g n e r /Arc h i te ct u ra IEducator,Cambridge, MATeam Members:Gerald E. Crane, AIA/AIP.Arc h itect / Urban Pla nner,Detroit, MlJohn R. Diehl, AlA, Architect,Princeton, NJJohn L. Gross, Jr.,T ra nsportation Plan ner,Philade/phia, PA

Earle T. Onque, AIA/AIP,Arc h itec t / U rba n Devel opmentAdministrator,Pittsburgh, PA

Pop u lat i on a pprox. 3OO, 0O0Visit requested by Flint AreaChapter/AlA. ModelCities Program.

4bllef onte, Pe nnsy fu a n nia27-29 Octobt 196S

Chairperson:Robert S. Sturgis, AlA,Architect/UrbanD e s i g n e r/A rc h i t ec t u ra IEducator,Cambridge, MA

Team Members:Edward R. Hoermann, AlP,U rba n Pla nner/ Pla n ni ngEducator,Cincinnati, OHFrancis D. Lethbridge, FAIA,Arc h itect / Urban Desig ner,Washington, DC

Population approx. 8, O0OVisit requested by CentralPe nnsylvania Ch apter/AlA.Decline of historic l9thCentury county seat.

5Mason, Michigan13-14 April 1969

Chairperson:Robert S. Sturgis, AlA,Architect/UrbanD es i g n e r /A rc h i tec t u ra IEducator,Cambridge, MA

Team Members:C. William Erubaker, FAIA,Arch itect /U rban Designer.Chicago, lLWilliam A. Gould, AIA/AIP,Arch itect / Urba n Plan ne r,

Cleveland, OH

Population approx. 7, 000Visit requested by Mid-Michigan Chapter/AlA. Oldcounty seat being dominatedby Lansing metropolitan area.

6Redmond, Weshingtonl7-20 octobcr 1969

Chairperson:Jules Gregory, FAIA,Architectl U rban Desi gner,Princeton, NJ

Team Members..DeNorval Unthank, AlA,Arch itect / U rban Designer,Eugene, ORMichael Wornum, AIA/AIP,Arch itect / U rban Pla n nerSan Francisco, CA

Population approx. 7 0,0O0Visit requested by SeattleChapter/AlA. Rapidly growingcity with undefined centralbusrness district.

IAkron, Ohiol7-19 Januray l97O

Chairperson:DeNorval Unthank, AlA,Arc h itect / Urba n Desi gner,Columbus, OH

Team Members:A. Donald Eourgeois, UrbanDevelopmentAd m i n i s tra to r / Pl a n n i n gEducator,Columbus, OHRon Ginn, AIA/AIP,Arch itec t / Urba n Plan ne rTreasure lsland, FL

Population approx. 3OO, 0OOVisit requested by AkronChapter/AlA. Model Cities areawith urban design and freewaycorridor problems.

IEly, Minnesota18-2O July 1970

Chairperson:C. William Brubaker, FAIA,Arch itect / Urba n Designer,Chicago, lL

Team Member:SamuelCaudill, FAIA,Arc h itect / Urban Designer,Aspen, CO

Population approx. 6,O0OVisit requested byNonheastern MinnesotaChapter/AlA. Old mining town,now a recreational center,lacking in character.

toDavenporl, lowal3-14 Scptembcr l97O

Chairperson:Henry Steinhardt, AlA,Arch itect / U rban DesignerMercer lsland, WA

Team Members:George W. Barton, FASCE,Transponailon Planner,Chicago, lLGeorge E. Kostritsky,AIA /Al P, Arch ircct / UrbanDesigner/Urban Planner,Baltimore, MD

Population approx. 98, OOO

Visit requested by Eastern lowaSection, lowa Chapter/AlAwith support of DowntownDavenport Assoc iat ion.Stagnant downtown inprosperous metropolitan area.7

Lynn, Massachusctts6-8 Decembu 1969

Chairperson:Henry Steinhardt, AlA,,Arc h ite c t / U rba n De s i g n er,Mercer lsland, WA

Team Members:Clarence E. Moran, AlA,Arc hitect / Urban Deielopme ntAdministator,Charleston, WVWillian Sheveland, AIA/AIP,Arch itect/ U rban Des ig n er,Mercer lsland, WAAlan M. Voorhees, AIP/FITE,Traffic Eng ineer / Transportati onPlanner,

Washington, DC

Population approx. 90,00OVisit requested by BostanSociety/AlA with suppon ofLynn Chamber of Commerce.Old central busrness districtlosing to shoppingcenters traffic.

tlFalls Church, Virginial5-17 May 1971

Chairperson:William A. Gould, AIA/AIP,Architec t / Urban Plann er,Cleveland, OH

Team Members:John J. Desmond, FAIA,Arc h itect / Urba n Designer,Baton Rouge, LAEarl (Wally) Henderson, Jr.,AlA, Architect, Springfield, lLPaul M. Savage, Jr., UrbanEconomist,Columbus, OH

Population approx. I 3,0OOVisit requested by VirginiaChapter/AlA and NorthernVirginia Section ofWashington, DC, Chapter/AlADeteriorating downtown andloss of identity as part ofWashingtonmetropalitan area.

t2Faiiax County, Viryinia2l-24 April 1972

Chairperson:Henry Steinhardt, AlA,Arc h itect / U rba n Desig ner,Mercer lsland, WA

Team Members:George W. Barton, FASCE,Transportation Planner,

Chicago, lLCharles A. Blessing, FAIA/AIP,Architect/UrbanDesi g ner/ U rban Devel opmentAdministrator,Detroit, MlC. William Brubaker, FAIA,Arc h itect / Urban Designer,Chicago, lLJohn W. McMahan, UrbanEconom ist / Urban Developme ntSpecialist,Los Angeles, CALawrence P. Melillo, A/4,Arch itect / U rba n Desi g ner,Louisville, KYJohn Reed, Ph.D., Ecologist,Madison, WlJoseph N. Wills, UrbanDesigner,New York, NY

Population approx. 2 50,OOOVisit requested by NorthernVi rgi nia Section, Wa s h in gtonMetropolitan Chapter/AlA andVirginia Chapter/AlA, withsupport of the Fairfax CountyPlan n i ng Com mission a ndFairfax County Board ofSupervisors. Problem of rapidgrowth of county-wide area.

,3CharwateL Flodda2O-22 May 1972

Chairperson:Jules Gregory, FAIA,Arc hitec t/ U rba n Designe r,Princeton, NJ

Team Members:Arthur Edwin Bye, FASLA,Landscape Architect,Cos Cob, CTJ. Richard McElyea, UrbanEcon omi st / Urba n Deve lopme ntSpecialist,San Francisco, CA

Ronald A. Straka, AlA,Arch itect / U rban Desig ner,Boulder, CO

Populailon approx. 60, OOO

Visit requested by ClearwaterSection of Florida Chapter/AlAwith support of communityleaders. Decline of downtownactivity.

,4Gainesvillc (Hall County),Georgb3-5June 1972

Chairperson:John Fisher-Smith, FAIA,Arc hiteu / Urba n Desig ner,San Francisco, CA

Team Members:John Decker, AlA,Arc h itect / U rba n Desi gner,Seattle, WAWillard C. Pistler, Jr., AlA,Architect,Cleveland, OHDonald Williams, AlA,Arch itect / U rban DevelopmentSpecialist, Louisville, KY

Population approx. I 6,OOOVisit requested by NonhG eorgia C h apter /Al A andGainesville Area Chamber ofCommerce with support byG ai nesvi lle C ity C om m i ssi onand the Hall CountyCommission. Rapid growth andincreased demand for services.

,5&tac, MontanalO-1 2 Junc 1972

Chairperson:Maynard W. Meyer, FAIA/AIP,Arc hitect /Urban Planner,Milwaukee, Wl

Team Members:Peter Batchelor, AIA/AI P,

Architect/UrbanDesigner/UrbanDesignEducator,Raleigh, NCJohn J. Desmond, FAIA,Arch itect / U rban Designer,Baton Rouge, LARalph L. Dix, Ph.D., Ecologist,

Ft. Collins, CORoyce LaNier, AIA/AIP,Arch itect/U rba n Planner,Milwaukee, WlEdward T. Ruppel, Ph.D.,Geologist,Helena, MTPaul D. Spreiregen, FAIA,Arch itect/ Urba n Desig ner,

Washington, DC

Population approx. I 6,000Visit requested by ButteSociety of Architects/AlA withsupport of Butte-Silver 9owCity-County Plannrng 7oard.Possible relocation of centralbusrness district and part of thecity.

16McMinnville, Orcgon19-21 May 1973

Chairperson:Ronald A. Straka, AlA,Arch itect / U rba n Desi gner,Eoulder, CO

Team Members:Jean W. Cobb, AIA/AIP,Arc h i t ec t / Urban Plan ner,

Mobile, ALNaaz G. Rovshen, UrbanEconomist,Los Angeles, CAMilo H. Thompson, AlA,Arch itect/ U rba n Desig ner,Minneapolis, MN

Population approx. I 2,00OVisit requested by SalemChapter/AlA supporred by CityManager and Chamber ofC om m erce of M c M in nvi lle.Deteriorati ng centra I bu sine s sdistrict and indecision ongrowth policy.

17Phocnir, Arizona18-21 January 1974

Chairperson:Lawrence P. Melillo, AlA,Arc h i tec t / Urban Desi gner,Lousiville, KY

Team Members:Charles A. Blessing, FAIA/AIP,Architect/UrbanDesigner / U rba n DevelopmentAdministrator,Detroit, MlJohn J. Desmond, FAIA,Arc h itect / U rban Des ig ner,

Eaton Rouge, LAJohn Neidercorn, Ph. D.,Urban Economist,Los Angeles, CAJohn Neuhold, Ph.D.,Ecologist,Logan, UTAlan M. Voorhees, AIP/FITE,

T ra ff i c E n g i n e e r / Tra n s portat i onPlanner,Washington, DCJohn Zeisel, Ph.D.,E nvironm ental S oci ol og ist,Cambridge, MA

Population approx. 1,000,000Visit requested by CentralArizona Chapter/AlA andcitizen's group Valley Forward.Options with respect tomobility, lifestyle and urbanform in future development ofthe metropolitan area.

t8Columbus, GeoryialPhoenixCity, Alabama2-4March 1974

Chairperson:Maynard W. Meyer,FA lA/Al P, Arc h itect / U rba nPlanner,Milwaukee, Wl

Team Members:Junius J. Champeaux, AlA,Arc h itect / Urba n Desig ne r,

Lake Charles, LADonald E. Cleveland,Transportation Pla n ne r,Ann Arbor, MlNeil W. Guda, AlA,Arc h itect / U rba n Des ig ner,Cleveland, OHStephen D. Julius, lll, UrbanEconomist/UrbanDe ve lopm e n t S pec ia I ist,Washington, DCBruce H. Murray, LandscapeArchitect,Madison Wl

Population approx. 1 50,00OVisit requested by WestGeorgia and Auburn, Alabama,Chapters/,41A with support oflocal government and civicorga nizations. Problems ofcentral business district andadja c en t h i storic district.

t9Honolufu. Hawaii6-9 Aptil 1974

Chairperson-'Robert S. Sturgis, FAIA,Architect/UrbanDes i g n e r /Arc h i tect u ra IEducator,Cambridge, MA

Team Members:Charles A. Blessing,FAIA/AI P, Arc h itec t / U rbanDesig ner / U rba n Deve lopmentAdministrator,Detroit, MlCarl Feiss, FAIA/AlP,Architect/UrbanPl an ne r / H istori c Pre se rvati onSpecialist,Gainesville, FL

Edward J. Logue, Hon., AlA,Urban DevelopmentAssociation Execuilve,New York, NYDavid O. Meeker, Jr.,FA lA/A I P, Arc h itect/ Urba nPlanner, Washington, DCRai Y. Okamoto, FAIA/AIP,Arc h itec t / U rba n Designer,San Francisco, CADavid L, Peterson,Lawyer/UrbanEconomist/UrbanDevel opm en t S pec ial i st,Claremont, CA

Population approx. 650,000Visit requexed by HawaiiChapter/AlA with supPort ofstate and local officials andagencies. Future ofunderdeveloped CentralHonolulu in a rapidly growingcity with limitedland resources.

20Wilson, North Carclina3-6 May 1974

Chairperson:Ronald A. Straka, AlA,Arch itect/ U rba n Desi gn er,Boulder, CO

Team Members:Harry W. Atkinson, UrbanEconomistlUrbanDevelopment Specialist,Atlanta, GAAlastair M. Black, AIA/AIP,Arc h itect/ Regiona I Planner,Atlanta, GA

Charles A. Blessing,FA lA /Al P, Arc h itect / Urba nDesign er/ Urba n DevelopmentAdministrator,Detroit, MlJohn J. Desmond, FAIA,Arc h itect / U rban Des igner,Baton Rouge, LACarl Marshall, UrbanEconomist/EconomicDevelopment S pec ialist,Atlanta, GARichard L. Rosen, AIA/AIP,Architect/UrbanPlan ner / H ousi ng S Peciali st,Rochester, NYRichard N. Tager,Lawyer/ U rban DeveloPmentSpecialist ,

Washington, DCWilliam L. Yancey, Ph.D.,E nvi ron mental Sociol og i st,Philadelphia, PA

Population approx. 3 2,OOOVisit requested by State ofNorth Carolina CommunitYDevelopment Section and Cityof Wilson, NC, with support ofthe Raleigh Section, NorthCarolina Chapter/AlA.Small town growth anddevelopment within a regionalframework, a demonstrationproject of the Nofth CarolinaDepafiment of Natural andEconomic Resources.

2tWarrcn County. Ohio3l lllay-3 Junc 1974

Chairperson.Royce LaNier, AIA/AlP,Arch itec t / U rba n Pla n ner,Madison, Wl

Team Members.Conrad Bagne,Lawyer/ G rowth M a na ge m entSpecialist,Seattle, WAC. William Erubaker, FAIA,Arc h itect / U rba n Des i gn er,Chicaga, lLJohn Lund Kriken, AIA/AIP,Arc h itect / U rba n Desi g ner,San Francisco, CAAnthony Neville,E n vi ron m e nta I Pla n n er,Louisville, KYRobert B. Shawn, UrbanEconomist/UrbanDevelopment Specialist.McLean, VA

Ronald A. Straka, AlA,Arc hitect / Urban Designer,Boulder, Ca

Population approx. 65,OO0Visit requested by CincinnatiChapter/AlA with support ofArea Progress Council, WarrenCounty Board ofCo m m is s ion e rs a n d Re giona IPlanning Committee.Problem of regional growthand development within ahistoric and rural framework.

22Lafayatte, lndhna6-9 Septcmber 1974

Chairperson:Ronald A. Straka, AlA,Arch itect/ Urban Designer,Boulder, CO

Team Members:John J. Desmond, FAIA,Arch itec t / U rba n Desi g ner,Eaton Rouge, L.A

William L. Haralson, UrbanEconomist/UrbanDevelopment Spec i a I i st,Chicago, lLTheodore L. Oldham,AIA/AIP, Architect/ UrbanDesigner,Washington, DCJoseph R. Passonneau, FAIA,Architect/UrbanD e s i g n e r /Arc h ite c t u ra IEducator,Washington, DCS. Jerome Pratter, AlPLawyer / U rba n Devel opm e ntSpecialist,St. Louis, MO

Population approx. 50,OO0Visit requested by CentralSouthern Chapter, lndianaSociety/AlA and the LafayetteR ede velop me n t C om m i ssion.Problem of railroad relocationand irc impact onthe community.

23Hendersonville, Tennessee1-4 November 1974

Chairperson:William A. Gould, AIA/AIP,Arc h itect / Urban Pl an ner,Cleveland, OH

Team Members:Daryl J. Butcher, UrbanE c on om i s t / R e c reat i ona IDe ve I op ment S pec ia I i st,McLean, VAGerald J. McLindon, ASLA,RIBA, LandscapeA rc h it e c t / En v iro n m e n t a IPla n ner/ Plann i n g E duc a tor,Baton Rouge, LAWilliam J. Voelker, lll, A/A,Architect,Peoria, lLllhan Zeybeck-Oglu, AlA,A rc h i tec t / Arc h i t e c t u ra IEducator,Cambridge, MA

Population approx. 2 5,O00Visit requested by MiddleTen nessee Ch a pter /A I A a ndthe Middle Tennessee Sectionof the Tennessee StarcPlanning Office.Rapidly growing suburban areain search of an identifiableurban form.

24Long Branch, New JerceylO-3January 1975

Chairperson:Ronald A. Straka, AlA,Arc h itect/ U rba n Design er,Boulder, CO

Team Members:Ben H. Cunningham, JR.,AlA, Architect/UrbanDesigner,Minneapolis, MNSuzanne Keller, Ph.D.,E n vi ronm e nta I Soc i ol og is t,Princeton, NJJ. Richard McElyea, UrbanEconomist/UrbanDevelopment S pec ia I ist,San Francisco, CACharles F. Redmon, AlA,Arc h itect / U rba n Desi gner,Cambridge, MAJames A. Veltman, ASLA,Landscape Architect,Woodlands, TX

Population approx. 3 1, 7 74Visit requested by ShoreChapter, New Jersey Societyof Architects/AlA and City ofLong Branch.Problem of changing urbancharacteristics of a small,oc ean fro n t res ort com m un i t y

in the nation's most heavilypopulated region.

25Mecon, GeorgielO-13 January 1975

Chairperson:Henry Steinhardt, AlA,Arc Ntect/ U rban Desi g ner,Mercer lsland, WA

Team Members:Peter Batchelor, AIA/AIP,Arch itect/ U rba n De sign e r /Urban Design Educator,Raleigh, NCWilliam R. Eager, Ph.D.,Tra n sportation Plan ner,Seattle, WARichard C. Frank, FAIA,Arc hitect / H istoric PreservationSpecialistAnn Arbor, MlFrank J. Hahn, UrbanEconomist/UrbanDeve lopme nt S pec i a I i st,Orlando, FL

Peter M. Hasselman, AlA,Arc h itect / U rban Des ign er,San Francisco, CA

R. Terry Schnadelbach,ASLA, Landscape Architect,Philadelphia, PA

Population approx. 206, 342Visit requested by the MiddleGeorgia Chapter/AlA.Prablem of central businessdistrict typified by decliningretail sales and departureof stores.

26Shteveport, Louisianal4-17 February 1975

Chairperson:Archibald C. Rogers,FA lA /A I P, Architect / U rba nDesigner,Baltimore, MD

Team Members:Herbert M. Franklin,Lawyer/G rowth ManagementSpecialist,Washington, DCWalter J. Monasch, AlP,Urban Planner/UrbanD eve I o p m e n t Ad m i n i s t ra t o rSanta Cruz, CADonald E. Moore, Downtown,Associat ion E xec uilve,Brooklyn, NYRiehard E. Starr, UrbanEconomist/UrbanDeve lop me nt S pec ia I ist,Ealtimore, MDRonald A. Straka, AlA,Arch itec t / U rba n Desig ne r,

Eoulder, COCy Wagner, Urban Desrgner,Austin, TX

Population approx. 294, 703Visit requested by ShreveportChapter/AlA. Problem wasdefining steps forimplementation action in thecontext of existing plans.

27Ncw Rochclle, New York26-28 April 1975

Chairperson:Lawrence P. Melillo, AlA,Arch itect/ U rba n Des i g ner,Louisville, KY

Team Members:Roger L. Creighton, AlP,T ra nsportat lon Pla n n er,Delmar, NYlsaac Green, AlA,Architect/Housing Specialist,East Lansing, MlKarl B. Radov, UrbanEcono m ist / Arc h itect u ra IEducator,Erookline, MARandhir Sahni, AlA, Architect,Houston, TXMilo H. Thompson, AlA,Arc h ite ct / Urba n Des i g ne r,Minneapolis, MN

Population approx. 75, 385Visit requested by theWestchester CountyChapter/AlAProblem of how to establishcohesion, quality, and identityof the central business districtand waterfront ofthis suburbanNew York community.

28Rcno, Nevada17-21 September 1975

Chairperson:Ronald A. Straka, AlA,Arc h itect/ Urba n Des ig n er,Boulder, CO

Team Members:Frank S. Bangs, Jr.,Lawyer/G rowth M an agemen tSpecialist,Tucson, AZRobert B. Bechtel, Ph.D.,Social Psychologist.Kansas CitV MOCharles A. Blessing, FAIA/A\p,Architect/UrbanDes i gner/ Urban Deve lopmen tAdministrator,Detroit, MlJohn J. Desmond, FAIA,Arch itec t / U rba n Desi g ner.Baton Rouge, LAWilliam Lamont, Jr., AlP,Urban Planner,Boulder, CORoy Mann, ASLA, LandscapeArchitect,Cambridge, MAJames Regan, UrbanEconomist/UrbanDe velopm e n t S pec ia li st,Los Angeles, CA

Population approx. 72, 863Visit requested by NorthernNevada Chapter/AlA andWestern MountainRegion/AlA.Problem in community identityand lack of citizen awarenessand interest inlocal conditions.

29Wichita Falls, Texas3-6 actobot 1975

Chairperson:Junius J. Champeaux, AlA,Arc h i tec t / U rba n Desig ner,Lake Chades. LA

Team Members:William Albinson, AlA,Arc h itect / Urban Desig ner,St. Louis, MOJay W. Earnes, AlA,Arc h itect / Urban Des ig n er,Austin, TXDouglas M. Schwartz, AlP,Urban Planner/UrbanEconomist/EconomicD eve I opment S peci a list,Atlanta, GAPiet Van Diik, AlA,Archi tect / U rban Designer,Cleveland, OH

Population approx. 96, 265Visit requested by WichitaFalls Chapter/AlA and theM idtown 2OO0 Subcommitteeof the Wichita Falls PlanningBoard. Problem ofmaintenance of a viablemidtown area.

30Vancouver, Washingtonl7-2O Octobcr 1975

Chairperson:Jules Gregory, FAIA,Arch itect/ Urba n De signer,Princeton, NJ

Team Members:Thomas R. Aidala, AlA.Arch itec t I Urban Designer,San Francisco, CAMichael C. Cunningham,Ph. D., AlA, ArchitectlUrbanDesigner,New York, NYClifford W. Graves, AlP,Urban Planner/PublicAdministrator,Washington, DCAdam Krivatsy, AIA/Al P,

Arc h itect / U rban Pla n ner,San Francisco, CAThomas A. Feeney, UrbanEconomist,San Francisco, CA

Population approx. 4 1, 859Visit requested by VancouverChapter/AlA.Problem concerned the futureof an existing 640 acrecentrally located tract of landcurrently used for a variety ofpublic purposes

3tAtlantic City, New Jersayl*17 November 1975

Chairperson:Rai Y. Okamoto, FAIA/AIP,Arc h itect / U rba n Des i g n er,San Francisco, CA

Team Members.Michael N. Danielson, PoliticalScientist,Princeton, NJStanton Eckstut, AlA,A rc h itect / Urba n Designe r,

New York, NYfuter M. Hasselman, AlA,Arc h itec t/ U rba n Desi g n e r,

San Francisco, CAFlorence Ladd, Ph.D.,EnvironmentalPsyc h o lo g i s t / Pla n n i n gEducator,Cambridge, MAJerome Michael, UrbanEconomist/UrbanDeve lopment S pec ia I ist,Bethesda, MDThomas VY. Ventulett, FAIA,Arc h i tect / U rba n Desi g ne r,

Atlanta, GA

Population approx. 47, 859Visit requested by SouthJersey Chapter/AlA and theAtlantic City ConventionBureau.Problem of significant urbandeteriora tion, ph ys i ca/l y an dsocially, and the repercussionon the tourist economv.

32Briston, Connecticut2l-24November 1975

Chairperson:Robert S. Sturgis, FAIA,Architeu/UrbanDe s ig n e r/Arc h i tec t u ra /Educator,Cambridge, MA

Team Members:Samuel B. Ashford, AlA,Arc h itect / Urba n De s ig n er,Raleigh, NCRoy Gerard, Ph.D., UrbanEconomist/UrbanDeve lopm e n t S pecialis t,Buffalo, NYHarry S. Weinroth, AlP,Urban Planner, UrbanDe vel opme nt Ad m i n i strator,Lawrence, MA

Population approx. 55, 487Visit requested by ConnecticutSociety of Architects/AlA andcivic groups in Bristol.Problem of declining centralbusiness district.

33DenvaL Colondo6-9 February 1976

Chairperson:Jules Gregory, FAIA,Arc hitect / Urban Designer,Princeton, NJ

Team Members:Jonathon Barnett, AIA/Al P,

Arc h itect / U rba n Desi g ne r,New York, NYCharles A. Blessing,FAI A/Al P, Arc h itect / U rba nDesigner, Urban DevelopmentAdministrator,Detroit, MlGary Fauth, TransportationPlanner/UrbanEconomist / Planning Educator,Cambridge, MAPeter M. Hasselmann AlA,Arc h itect / U rba n Des ig ne r,San Francisco, CA

David N. Lewis,R I BA/AI A/Al P, Arc h i tect / U rba nDesigner,Pittsburgh, PASumner Myers,Tra ns portati on Pl a n ner,Washington, DCRichard N. Tager,Lawyer / U rba n Developm en tSpecialist,Washington, DC

Population approx. l, 506, 800Visit requested by ColoradoCentral C hapter/Al A, C ol oradoSociety/AlA and Denver CityCouncil.Request to evaluate the designand planning implications ofthe proposed rail rapidtransit corridor.

34Dafton, Georgia22-25 April 1976

Chairperson:Thomas R. Aidala, AlA,Arc h itec t/ U rba n Des i g n e r,San Francisco, CA

Team Members:John K. Haeseler, UrbanEconomist,McLean, VARobert M. Leary, A/P, UrbanPla n ner/ La wyer / G rowthM a n a gem ent S pec i al i st,Raleigh, NCCharles F. Redmon, AlA,Arch itect / U rba n Des i gn er,Cambridge, MACharles E. Steinman, UrbanD esi gner/ U rba n De velop m e ntSpecialist,Boston, MA

Population approx. 1 8,87 2Visit requested by the ,AtlantaChapter/AlA and the Mayorand City Council of Dalton.Problem of providtng adequatepublic services and facilities tomeet the needs of continuedgrowth and expansion basedon a healthy, local economy.

35Lexington, Kentucky2l-24 May 1976

Chairperson:Joseph R. Passonneau, FAIA,Arc h itect/ U rban Des ig n er /Arc h itect u ra I Ed ucator,Washington, DC

Team Members:Henry Arnold, ASLA,La ndscape Arch itect/ LandPlanner,Princeton, NJJoseph R. Buckley, UrbanDeve lopment Speci a I ist,Blue Bell, PARalph F. Evans, AlA,Arch itect/ Urban Desi gner,Salt Lake City, UTDavid Harrison, Jr., Ph.D.,Urba n Economist / PlanningEducator,Cambridge, MADavid N. Lewis,R I BA/A lA/Al P, Arc h itect/ U rba nDesigner,Pittsburg, PA

Population approx. 108,1 37Visit requested by EastKentucky Chapter/AlA and theLexington DowntownDevel opment C om m i ssi on.Problem of how to controldevelopment activity andprovide esse ntia I pu bl i cservices and facilities for rapidexpansion and growth.

36Gunnison County, ColorudolO-13 September 1976

Chairperson:Adam Krivatsy, AIA/AlP,Arc h i tect / U rba n Pla n ner,San Francisco, CA

Team Members:Rod F ree bairn- Sm ith, AlA,Arch itect / U rban Des i gne r,

San Francisco, CARobert K. Nyguist, UrbanEconomist,Seattle, WAToby Arthur Ross, Ph.D.RegionalPlan n er / G eograph e r/ E n vi ro n -

mental PlannerPetaluma, CAR. Marlin Smith,Lawye r / G ro wth M a na ge m en tSpecialist,Chicago, lLDavid Stea, EnvironmentalS ociologi st /Arc h itectu ra IEducator,Los Angeles, CAAlbert Tsao, Ph.D.,E nvi ron menta I Pl a n ne r.Helena, MT

Population approx. 1 0,OO0Visit requested by ColoradoCentral Chapter AlA.Problem of en viron m enta Iimpact of unlimited growth olskiing, hunting, and miningactivities in an insecurepolitical and social context.

37Birmingham, Alabamal-4 October 1976

Chairperson:Stantan Eckstut, AlA,Arc h itect / Urba n Des ig ner,New York, NY

Team Members:Charles P. Boyce, UrbanEconomist,Cambridge, MADonald Conway, AlA,Arc h itec t /Arch ite ct u ra IResearch Specialist,McLean, VA

John J. Desmond, FAIA,Arc h itect / Urba n Des ig ne r,Baton Rouge, LAJulia Hall, Ph.D.,E n vi ron m en ta I Psyc h o log i st,Philadelphia, PARonald B. Kull, AlA,Arc h i tec t/ Urba n De sig nAdministrator,Cincinnati, OHJack Patrick, AlA,Arc h itect I U rba n Desi g ner,Adelphi, MDR. Terry Schnadelbach,ASLA, Landscape Architect,Philadelphia, PA

Ron Shiftman, NeighborhoodD evelo p m ent S pec ia I i st,Brooklyn, NY

Population ap7rox. 3OO, 0O0Visit requested by theB i rm i n g ha m C h a Pte r/A lA.

Problem to studY three tYPical

urban neighborhoods in urbangrowth situations.

38Moore County, NorthCarolina8-l 1 october 1976

Chairperson:Jules Gregory, FAIA,Arc h itect / U rba n Des i g ne r,

Princeton, NJ

Team Members:Brian D. Bash, UrbanEconomist/UrbanDe velopment S pec ia I ist,McLean, VA

Lewis Goldshore,La wyer / W aste M a nage me ntSpecialist,Trenton, NJAvis C. V. Gordley, AlP,Urba n Pla nner/ Pla n n in gEducator,Cambridge, MAPaul D. Spreiregen, FAIA.Arch i te c t /U rba n Des ign er,Washington, DCWilliam L. Yancey, Ph.D.,E n vi ron m e ntal Soc i ol og ist,Philadelphia, PA

Population approx. 40,OOOVisit requested bv theSandhills Area Chamber ofCommerce.Problem of fear of physicaldeterioration in beautiful resortarea (24 championshipgolf courses)-

39St. Louis Forest Perk,Missouri28 October-l November,976

Chairperson:Junius J. Champeaux, AlA,A rc h itect / Urba n Des ig nerLake Charles, LA

Team Members:Elizabeth Barlow, OpensPacePlanner,New York, NYM ichael C u nni ngha m, AS LA,Landscape Archircct,New York, NYJerry Goldberg, AlP, UrbanPla n n er/ Urban Desi gner,

San Francisco, CAThomas Martin, UrbanEconomist/RecreationDeve lopment S pec ia list,BoSIon, MAMalcolm A. Misuraca,Lawye r/ G rowt h M a n a g e m e n tSpecialist,Santa Rosa, CARaymond Stanland, Ph. D.,

Al P, Urban Planner/UrbanDesigner,Dallas, TX

Population approx. l,0OO,OO0Visit requested by St. LouisChapter/AlA.Problem of urban pressures onForest Park, a large historicdowntown open area.

40Trcnton, New Jetscy25-28 February 1977

Chairperson:Stanton Eckstut, AlA,Arc h itect/ U rba n Desi g ner,New York, NY

Team Members:Harold K. Bell, UrbanEcon om ist I Arch i tect u ralEducator,Ardsley, NYVictor Caliandro,Arch itec t/ U rba n Des ign er,New York, NYGhislaine Hermanuz,Arc h i tect/ Urba n Designer,New York, NYPatricia C. Jones, ArtsAssoc iat ion Adm i nistrator,New York, NYGarrison McNeil,Arc h it ect/ Urban Designer,New York, NYJanet Scheff, Ph.D.,EnvironmenElS oc i ol o g i s t/ Arc h i te c tu ra IEducator,New York, NYStanley Stark, AlA,Arch itect/ Urba n Des ig n er,New York, NYEdwin W. Woodmen, UrbanDeve lo pment S peciali st,New York, NY

Population approx. 1 04, 638Visit requested by TrentonDepartment of Planning andDevelopment,A microscopic view of theproblems of adec I i n ing neigh borh ood.

4'Ft. Smith, Arkansas1 l-14 frlarch 1977

Chairperson:Lawrence P. Melillo, AlA,Arc h itec t /U rba n Desig ner,Louisville, KY

Team Members:Alastair M. Black, AIA/AIP,Arch itect/ U rban Designer,Atlanta, GA

Charles F. Harper, AlA,Arc h itect / U rba n Desi g ner,Wichita Falls, TXLangdon E. Morris, Jr., AlA,Arc h ite ct / H isto ri c Pre serva ti onSpecialist,Denver, CODouglas M. Schwartz, AlP,Urban Planner/UrbanEconomist/EconomicDevelopment Specialist,Atlanta, GA

Population approx. 70, OO0

Visit requested by the Ft.Smith Section of the ArkansasChapter/AlA.Problem of a declining centralbusiness district and concernabout its economic future.

42Lanshtg, tullchigan*7 June 1977

Chairperson:David N. Lewis,Rl 8A/A|A /Al P, Arc h itect/Urba nDesigner,Pinsburgh, PA

Team Members:James Carberry, Journalist,New York, NYJohn P. Clarke, AIA/AIP,Arch itect / Urba n Desig ner,Trenton, NJJohn E. Cummings, UrbanEconomist,Minneapolis, MlPeter Hasselman, AlA,Architect/ Urban Designer,San Francisco, CAJerry Pollak, AIA/AIP,Architect/ Urban Designer,Los Angeles, CADennis Ryan, Ph.D., AlP,Urban Designer/UrbanPlanner/Urban DesignEducator,Seattle, WACarroll William Westfall,Ph.D., ArchitecturalHistori a n Arc h itectu ra IEducator,Chicago, lL

Popu lat ion approx. 4 40, OOO

Visit requested by Mid-Michigan Chapter/AlA.Problems of peripheralsh oppi ng centers, su burba rtexpansion and freewaysdraining the tradiilonalstrengths of the city center.

#,West Paln &cach, Florida2O-23 *Jev 1977

Chairperson:Thomas R. Aidala, A/4,Arc h itect / U rban Desig ne r,San Francisco, CA

Team Members:Henry Arnold, ASLALandscape Arc h itect / LandPlanner,Princeton, NJJohn J. Desmond, FAIA,Arc hitect / U rba n Desig ner,Eaton Rauge, LAJose A. Gomez-lbanez,Ph.D., TransportationPlanner/Mass TransitSpecialist,Cambridge, MAFrederick F. Kennedy, UrbanEconomist,McLean, VAA. Dan Tarlock,Lawyer / G rowth M a nageme ntSpecialist/Environmental LawSpecialist,Evanston, lLFred Travisano, AlA,Arc hitect / U rba n Developm entAdministrator,Trenton, NJ

Visit requested by Palm BeachChapter/AlA.Decline of a classic smalldowntown due to suburbandevelopment and generaldisinterest in the area.

tt4Portsmouth, Virginia17-2OJunc 1977

Chairperson:Clifford W. Graves, AlP,Urban Planner/PublicAdministrator,San Diego, CA

Team Members:Harold K. &ell, UrbanE c on o m i st / Arc h i te c t u ra IEducator,Ardsley, NYWilliam P. Durkee, AlA,Arch itect / U rban Desig ner,Pittsburgh, PAAlex Eckmann, TransporationPlanner,Washington, D.C.John Loss, AlA,A rc h i tec t /Arc h i tec tu ralEducator,Raleigh, NCRoy Mann, ASLA, LandscapeArchitect,Cambridge, MAJohn J. Orofino, UrbanDesigner,Washington, DCBetty Woody, Ph.D.,En vi ron mental S oc iol ogi st,Cambridge, MA

Population approx. I OO,OOOVisit requested by theT idewater C h a pter/AlA.Problem of central area declineand focus fordowntown revita lization.

45Llbcrty Park, Ncw Jersey23-26 Scptember 1977

Chairperson:Junius J. Champeaux, AlA,Architect/ Urban Desi gner,Lake Charles, LA

Team Members:Arlo Braun, Urban Designer,Philadelphia, PAAnthony B. Casendino, AlA,Arc h itect / U rban Designer,Boston, MAFelicia Reed Clark, AlP, UrbanPlanner,New York, NYDavid Cooper, UrbanD eve I o pm e n t Ad m i n ist ra t or,Alexandria, VA

Jacguelyn H. Hall,Ne igh bo rh ood De ve / o p m e n tSpecialist,Cambridge, MAAlan Mallach, UrbanEc on om i st / H ousing S pec ia list,Trenton, NJ

Population approx. I 5,OO0Visit requested by New JerseySociety of Architects/AlA andvarious local organizationsProblem concerningdevelopment of Liberty StatePark and redevelopment oncity-owned land adjacentto the park

t6Tacoma, Washington28-3, Octobsr 1977

Chairperson:Michael C. Cunningham,Ph. D., AlA, Architect/UrbanDesigner,New York, NY

Team Members:Garland Anderson, Jr.,D eve lo per/ N e i g h borh oodD eve I op m en t S pec i a I i st,Houston, TXElbert T. Bishop,Lawyer/EconomicDevel o p m e n t S p ec i a I i st,Boston, MAWillian S. Donnell, Real EstateDeve I o p m e n t S pec ia li s t,

Chicagq lLfuter M. Hasselman, AlA,Arch itect / Urban Des igne4San Francisco, CA

C. Todd Heglund, PE,

Tra n s po rtatio n Pla n n er,Minneapolis, MNJoseph G. Madonna,Lawye r/ U rban Developmen tAdministratoLColumbus, OHDon Shaw, PE, Waterway andShipping Specialist,Pittsburgh, PA

Population approx. I 55,OOOVisit requested by the TacomaChapter/AlA.Downtown decay and lack ofleadership commirument in ahealthy industrial andshipping area.

47Detroit, MichiganJunc 2-5, 1978

Chairperson:Thomas W. Ventulett, FAIA,Arch itect/ Urban Desig ner,Atlanta, GA

Team Members:John Lund Kriken, AIA/AlP,Architec t / U rban Desi gner,San Francisco, CAConstance Perin, Ph. D.,Anthropologist,Cambridge, MAMichael John Pittas, AlP,Urban Plan ne r/ Plan n ingEducator,Winchester, MANicholas Auennell, AS LA,Landscape Architect,New York, NYDonald L. Stull, AlA,Architect/Urban Designer,Boston, MAAlan M. Voorhees, AIP/FITE,TrafficE n g i n ee r / T ra n s portat i o nPl a n n e r / Arc h i tec t u ra IEducator,Chicago, lL

Population approx. l,600,0OOVisit requesred by the DetroitChapter/AlA, ASSO, and RenCen Corp. Focus ondeveloping linkage betweenthe new Renaissance Centerand dawntown Detroit.

ILatayotte, LouisianaJunc 2-5, 1978

Chairperson:Jerry Pollak, AIA/AIP,Arch itect/ Urba n Designer,Los Angeles, CA

Team Members:Howard S. Bloom, UrbanE c o n o m i s t / T ra n s p o rta t i o nPlanner,Cambridge, MAFelicia Reed Clark, AlP, UrbanPlanner,Boston MALaw rence Coff i n, AS LA lAl P,Landscape Arch itect / U rba nPlanner,Washington, D.C.Todd Lee, AlA,Arch itect / U rban Designer,Cambridge, MADale H. Levander, UrbanEconomist,Palos Verdes, CAMalcolm Misuraca,Lawyer/G rowth m a nagem entSpecialist,Santa Rosa, CAEarl M. Starnes, Ph.D.,FAIA/AI P, Arc h itec t/ Urba nPl a n n er/A rc h i te c tu ra I Ed u c a to r,Gainesville, FL

Population approx. 5 3, OOO

Visit requested by SouthLou isiana C hapter/AlA.Problems ofTra ffi c / T ra n s porta t i o r t

City/Parishunplanned growth.

Ann AftorlYpsilanti,MichiganJum 23-26, 1978

Chairperson:Ben H. Cunningham JR., AlA,Arc h itect / Urba n Designer,Minneapolis, MN

Team Members:lan Ball, fulitical Scientist,Minneapolis, MNhul Euckhurst, Rl &A/A|P,Arc h i tect / Re g i on a I Pl a n n er,New York, NYAnthony DiSarcina, PE,

Tra n s portat io n Pl a n n e r,

Boston, MAEdgar Galson, PE,

E nviron mental E n gineer,Syracuse, NYHarry Garnham, LandscapeArchitect,College Station, TXNorman Hoover, AlA,Arch itect / Urban Designer,Houston, TXJim Murray, Urban Economist,Boulder, CO

Visit requested by HuronValley Chapter/AlA.Problem of growth pressuresand potential. Suggexedmechanisms or guidelines fordirecting and controlling it.

50Corpus Christi, Toxasoctobcr 12-16, ,978

Chairperson:Jerry Goldberg, AlP, UrbanPlanner / Urban De signer,San Francisco, CA

Team Members:James E. Bock, AlP, UrbanPlanner/UrbanEconomist/UrbanDevelopment S pec ia list,Houston, TXGiuliano Fiorezoli, UrbanDesigner,New York, NYAlfred W. French,lll,AIA/AI P, Arc h iect I U rbanPlanner,Minneapolis, MNRoger B. Lujan, AlA,Arc h itect/ Urban Designer,Albuguerque, NMLydia Elena Mercado,Neigh borhood DevelopmentSpecialist,Cambridge, MAJeffrey Prottas, Ph. D.,Pol itical Sc ientist/ PlanningEducator,Cambridge, MAR. Marlin Smith,Lawy er / G ro wth M a n a ge m e n tSpecialist,Chicago, lL

Population approx. 2 2 5, OOO.

Visit requested by CorpusChristi Chapter/AlA andCitizens R/UDAT of CorpusChristi, lnc.Problem was to show howgood planning andde vel op men t strarcgie s cou ldimprove the city's future in thecontext of present andprojected economic, c u ltu ral,politicalandsocial conditions.

5tMedfo rd/SpooneL WisconsinNovember 2-5. ,978

Chairperson:Fred Travisano, AlA,Arc h itect / U rban De sig n e r,Trenton, NJ

Team Members:David Abramson, AlA,Arc h i tect / H i storic Pre servat i onSpecia/lst,New York, NYRita Bamberger,Tra n sportati on Pla nn er,Washington, DCWilliam Beyer, UrbanDesigner,Minneapolis, MNSusan Conner.Lawye r/ G rowth M a nag e m e ntSpecialist,Waukegan, lLKa thleen Kelly, En viron me n ta IPlanner,Philadelphia, PAFelic i t y B rogden- Olls w a n g,Ph. D., Architectural Educator,Milwaukee, WlR. Terry Schnadelbach,ASLA, Landscape Architect,Philadelphia, PAEdward Whitelaw, UrbanEconomist,Eugene, OR

Population approx.' Spooner,2,543; Medford,4,O64Visit requested by NorthwestWis-consin Chapter/AlA andNorthwest Regional PlanningCommission.Problem of downtawnrevitalization rn the smallc om m u nities th rou g h ou tthe region.

52Bellairc, TexasNovcmber lO-13, 1978

Chairperson:Ronald B. Kull, AlA.Arc h itect / U rba n De si g nAdministrator,Cincinnati, OH

Team Members:Harold K. Bell, UrbanE c onom i st / Arc h itectu ra IEducator,New York, NYBeatriz De WinthuysenCoffin, Landscape Arch itect,Washington, DCSu mne r Myers, T ra nsporat i onPlanner,Washington, DCG. Gray Plosser, Jr., AlA,Arcn itec t / U rba n De si g ner,Eirmingham, ALMichael D. Sinclair, AlA,Lawyer/ G rowth M a n ag e m e ntSpecialist,Boston, MANore V. Winter, UrbanDesigner,Denver, CO

Population approx. 20,OOO(within the city limits ofHouston, Texas.)Visit requested by HoustonChapter/AlA and the City ofBellaire. Problem ofcommunity image, landdevelopment and trafficcongestion with a focus on thece ntra / bu sin ess distric t.

53Latedo, TcxasDecembu l-4, 1978

Chairperson:John P. Clarke, AIA/AIP,Arch itect/ Urban Desi gner,Trenton, NJ

Team Members:Dennis Carlone, UrbanDesigner,Cambridge, MAHermann H. Field, FAIA/AIP,Architect/UrbanDesigner/ Regional Pla nner,Shirley, MAGeoffrey Freeman, AIA/Rl BA,Arc h itect /Urba n De sig ner,New York, NYMel Gamzon, UrbanEconomist,Boston, MABennie M. Gonzales, FAIA,Arc h itect / U rba n Desig ner,Phoenix, AZMichael A. Powills, Jr.,Al C P/ PE, Tra n sporta tio nPla n ner/ Tra ffic E ngineer,Evanston. lLE dw a rd Su llivan, G rowthM a n a geme nt Spec i al i st,Portland, ORJames A. Veltman,,ASLA,Landscape Architect,Woodlands, TX

Population approx. 7 5,O0OVisit requested by LaredoChamber of Commerce,Laredo Section, San AntonioChapter/AlA.Problem of deterioration ofcentral bu si ness distri ct,unplanned growth,racial issues.

54Oldham County, KentuckyDecember'l-4, 1978

Chairperson.Thomas R. Aidala, AlA,Arc h itect / Urban Desig n er,San Francisco, CA

Team Members:Gordon Clark, Ph.D., UrbanEconomist,Cambridge, MARodney H a rdy, De vel ope r,Minneapolis, MNRandolph Jones, AIA/AlPArc h itec t / U rban Des i g n e r,Boston, MAS. Jerome Pratter, AlP,Lawyer/ G rowth M a na gem entSpecialist,St. Louis, MOToby Arthur Ross, Ph.D.,EnvironmentalPl a n n er / G eog ra ph e r/ R e g i o n a IPlanner,Petaluma, CALee Swenson, UrbanEcono m ist / S oc ia I Sc ien t i st,San Francisco, CA

Population approx. 24,OOOVisit requested by CentralKentucky Chapter/AlA.

resulting fromsuburbanization

55Knoxville, TennesseeMarch 23-26, ,979

Chairperson:Junius J. Champeaux, AlA,Arc h itect / U rba n Desi gner,Lake Charles, LA

Team Members:John Andrew Gallery, UrbanD eve I op m e nt Ad m i n i st ra to r,

Philadelphia, PADan M. Gatens, TransportationPlanner,Bouldel COfurcival Goodman, FAIA,Arch itect / U rba n Desig ner,New York, NYFrank S. Kelly, AlA,Arc h itec il U r ba n De s i g n e r,

Houston, TX

futer C. McCall, Journalist,Washington, DCfuter Rothschild, LandscapeArchitect,New York, NY

Population approx. 1 Bl,00O.0 970)Visit requested by EastTe n nessee Ch apter/AlA.To identify and assess long-range benefits and possibledeficiencies resulting fromEXPO-92 and their impact onKnoxville'shuman environment.

To provide direction for control Alan Mallach, Urbanofrapidgrowth,especially Economist/Housingspecialist,problems of dislocations Philadelphia, PA

56Olympia, WashingtonApnl2O-23, 1979

Chairperson:Charles F. Redmon, AlA,Arch it ect / U rba n Desig n e r,Cambridge, MA

Team Members:Charles A. Blessing,FAI A /A I C P, Arch itect/ U rba nDes i g ne r/ Urba n Deve lopm e n tAdministrato4Detroit, MlShirley A. (Billid Bramhall,Neigh borh ood Devel opm entSpecialistDenver, COJohn K. Haesseler, UrbanEconomist,McLean, VA

futer M. Hasselman, AlA,Arch i tectl U rba n Desi gner,San Francisco, CA

Dean K. Hunt,Lawyer/Waterway andShipping Specialist,Pinsburgh, PADaniel R. Mandelker,Lawye r/G rowt h M a nagementSpecialist,St. Louis, MOSu m ner M yers, Tra nsportat io nPlanner,Washington, DCBernard P Spring, FAIA,Arch itect / Urban Desig ner,Harrison, NY

Population approx. I 20,OO0fi 979)Visit requested by SouthwestW a s h i n gton C h apter/A lA.Study growth problems of thenext twenty years and identifygoals for the CentennialCelebration in 1989.

57Spilngfield, lllinoisApril2T-3O, 1979

Chairpersons:Mort Karp, AlA,Arc h i tec t / A rc h i t e c tu ra IEducator,Fayetteville, ARLangdon E. Morris, JR., AlA,Architect/ HistoricPreservation S pec i alist,Denver, CO

Team Members:John J. Desmond, FAIA,Arc h itec t / U rban Des igner,Baton Flouge, LAWilliam M. Dikis, AlA,Arc hitect / H istoric Preserva t i onSpecialist,Des Moines, lAFred C. Doolittle,Lawyer/ U rban E c onom i st,Cambridge, MADavid B. Smith, AICP,Lawyer/Urban Planner,Baston, MA

Population approx. I 1,000(1 970)Visit requested by SangamonCounty Section of the Centrallllinois Chapter/AlA.Define and analyze the city,the region and, in particular,the h istoric a I ly sig ni fica ntcentral business area andgovernmental complexes asthey interact.

58Kansas City, MissouriMay 29-June 3, 1979

Chairperson:Ben H. Cunningham JR., AlA,Arch itect / U rba n Desig ner,Minneapolis, MN

Team Members:William G. Conway, UrbanEconomist/Real EstateDeve I opment S pec ia lis t,West Palm Beach, FLHermann H. Field, FAIA/AIP,Architect/UrbanDes i g ner/ Poli ti cal Sc ie n t i s t,

Shirley, MALester Gross,Lawyer/Developer,Columbia, SCBryan Grunwald, AIA/AlCP,Urban Planner/UrbanDesigner,San Francisco, CAErnest W. Hutton, JR., AICP,Urban PlannerlUrbanDesigner,New York, NYSarah La&elle, AICP,Transportation Planner,Argonne, lLRich a rd West mac ott, A S LA,Landscape Architect,Athens, GA

Population approx. 5O7, 330,( 1 970)Visit requested by Kansas CityChapter/AlA.Develop rec om mendati onsand policies which willenhance growth of Northlandarea of Kansas City whilepursuing conservativefinancial policies.

59New Orleans, LouisianaJanuary 18-21,198O

Chairperson:David N. Lewis,RIBA/FAIA/AICP.Arc h itect/ Urban Desig ner,Pittsburgh, PA

Team Members.John Blaine, Arts AssociationExecutive,Houston, TXLance Jay Brown,Architec t / Urba n Desi gner,New York, NYKent Bloomer,S c ulptor/ En viron m enta IArti st /Archi tectura I Ed uc ator,Guilford, CTGary C. Johnson, AlA,Arc h itect / U rba n Designer,Cambridge, MAFlarence Ladd, Ph.D., Hon.AlA, EnvironmentalPsychologist,Wellesley, MALaurie D. Olin, LandscapeArc h i tec t / E n v i ro n m e nt a IPlanner,Philadelphia,PAMary Miss,Sc u lptor / E n viron menta I Art ist,New York, NYJohn M. Woodbridge, FAIA,Arch itect / U rba n Desig ne r,Berkley, CA

Population apprax. 577,OOO(1980)Visit requested by the NewOrleans Chapter/AlA, and theCity of New Orleans.Assist the Citv of New Orleansand its citizens in setting up aprogram for action in DuncanPlaza, the center of ametropolitan park.

60Louisvillc, KentuckyFeb. 29-March 3.1984

Chairperson:Ronald A. Straka. FAIA,Arc h itect / Urba n Designer.Boulder, CO

Team Members:Gordon L. Bringham UrbanDe ve I opm e n t Ad m i n i stra tor,Boston, MAPeter H. Brink,LawyerlPreservationAssociation Executive,Galveston, TXWilliam S. Dannell,Deve/oper,Chicago, lLRodney W. Kelly, UrbanTra n s p o rta t i o n Adm i n is ta tor,Dallas, TXMilton Kotler, NeighborhoodDevelopmentS pec i a I i s t / N e i g h bor h oodAssociation E xecut ive,Washington, DCBarbara Yanow Litchenstein,N eigh borh ood Devel opm e ntSpecialistCincinnati, OHTheodore A. Monacelli, AlA,Arch itect / U rba n Designer,Cambridge, MADonald E. Moore, DowntownAssociation Executive,New York, NY

Population approx. 298,OAA(7 980)Visit requested by the CentralKe ntu cky C h apter/A lA, a ndthe Louisville R/UDAT SteeringCommittee.Recommend a plan andprocess to bring the variousfactions in the communitytogether to jointly determinethe future of Louisville'sCentral Business District.

61Lincoln, NebraskaMarch 28-3r, ,98O

Chairperson:Felicia Reed Clark, AICP,Urban Planner,Boston, MA

Team Members:Sinclair Black, AlA,A rc h i t ec t / Arc h ite c t u ra IEducator,Austin, TXAllen Gerstenberger, UrbanDevelopment Spec ia list,Eoulder, CO

NealB. Glick, Lawyer,Eoston, MAKenneth E. Kruckemeyer,N eig h borh ood Developm e ntSpecialist,Boston, MAMa rga ret Ma gu ire, Recreati onPlanner,Washington D.C.David Stea, Ph.D.Planner/Architect,Los Angeles, CA

Population approx. I 7 2,OO0( t 980)Visit requested by the Lincoln,Nebraska Chapter/AlA and theLincoln Radial ReuseTask Force.ldentify the most desirableland use alternatives anddevelopment strategies forne igh borhood revita lizat i onalong the Northwest radialtransportation corrider.

62Hillsboro, Oregon18-21 April l98O

Chairperson:Junius J. Champeaux, FAIA,Lake Charles, LA

Team Members:James E. Bock, AICP,Houston, TexasJames W. Christopher, AlA,salt Lake city, uTChristopher G. Costin,Santa Rose, CAJeffrey A. Grote, AICP,San Francisco, CAKathleen Kelly,E nvi ron mental Pl an ner,New York, NYCarroll William Westfall,Ph. D., Architectural Historian,Chicago, lL

Population approx- 3 l,0OO(1980)Visit requested by the PortlandChapter/AlA, and the HillsboroDevelopment C om m ission.Examine the changes thathave taken place in the recentpast, and those expected withthe influx of new residents andbusinesses in the future.

63Sallsbury, filaryland2-5 tiey l98O

Chairperson:Eernard P. Spring, FAIA,Harrison, NY

Team Members:G ay C rowt her, La ndsca peArchitect,Annapolis, MDJoseph Dennis, Developer,Englewood, FL

Peter Hasselman, AlA,San Francisco, CAM. David Lee, AlA.Cambridge. MAWayne Lemmon, Economist,McLean, VA

Michael Painter, ASLA,San Francisco, CAConstance Perin, Ph. D.,Anthropologist,Cambridge, MACharles B. Zucker. UrbanDesigner/FundingAssoc iation Admi n istrator,Washington D.C.

Population approx. I 6, 40O( 1 980)Visit requested by theC hesa pea ke Bay C ha pter/AlA,and the Salisbury CentralSusiness District Study andVitalizationAdvisory Council.

64Boston's South End/LowcrRox bury, lltassac husctts9-12 May 1980

Chairperson:John P Clarke, AIA/AICP,Trenton, NJ

Team Members:Harold K. Bell, UrbanE conom i st /Arc h itectu ra IEducator,New York, NYDonald Conway, AlA,Arc h ite ct /A rc h it e ct u ra IResearch Specialist,Los Angeles, CARandall K. Fujiki, AlA,Archi tec t / Urba n Desi gner,Princeton, NJClifford W. Graves, AICP,Urban Planner/PublicAdministrator,San Diego, CAJose J. Mapily, AlA,Arc hi tect / H istoric PreservationSpecialist,Washington, DCErnest R. Munch, AlA,Architect/UrbanDe s i g n e r / T ra n s p orta t i o nPlanner,Portland, ORDavid Vann, Lawyer/ElectedOfficial,Birmingham, AL

I t 975)Visit requested by the BastonSociety of Architects/AlA, andthe United South End/LowerRoxbury DevelopmentCorporation.Stimulate the City of Boston,local business, and residentinterest in the redevelopmentof the South End/LowerRoxbu ry com merc ial c orridor.

65Wilmington, DelawareMay 16-19,198O

Chairperson:Fred Travisano, AlA,Arc h itect / U rban Desi g ner,Trenton, NJ

Team Members:William C. Badger, Develope4Burlington, MARoy P Frangiamore, AlA,Arch itect/ Urban DesignetAtlanta, GADan M. Gatens, TransportationPlannetBoulddn COSteven A. George, AlA,Arc h itect / U rban Desi gner,

Pittsburgh, PAJacquelyn H. Hall,N e i g h borh o od Deve I op m e ntSpecialist/EconomicDevelopment Specialist,Cambridge, MAErnest W: Hutton, JR., AICP,Urban Planner/Urban Designer,Brooklyn, NYLane J. Johnson, Geographer,Philadelphia, PAPhilip Monis,J o u rn a I i st /A rc h itec t u ra I W ri te rBirmingham, AL

Population approx. 70, 440I 1 980)Visit requested by theDelaware Society ofArchitects/AlA.Study of approaches that willstress communication andpublic awareness in thedevelopment and planning ofthe Wilmingtonmetropolitan area.

66Topeka, KansasJurc6-9,198O

Chairperson:Ronald B. Kull, AlA,Arch itect / Urba n Des ig nAdmi n istratorC in c innat i, O H

Team Members:Brian D. Bash, UrbanEconomist/UrbanDe ve lopm e n t S pec i a I i st,McLean, VAChristopher Keys, Ph. D.,Psychologist,Eugene, ORJohn Kirkwood White,Lawyer/G rowth M a na gem e n tSpecialist,Washington, DCTed Kreines, AICP, UrbanPlanner,Triburon, CAMurray C. McNeil, FAIA,Arch ite ct/ Urban Design er,Oakland, CACynthia Rice, ASLA,Landscape Architect,New York, NYRobert Whelan, Ph.D.,Political Scientist,Jacksonville, FL

Population approx. I 16,00Ofi 980)Visit requested by the KansasS oc iety of Arc h itec ts /A lA,Topeka Section, and theTopeka Capital CityRedevelopment Agency.Respond to the issue ofprocess, conflict,management, and the need fora framework toprepare an urbande s ig n /de ve lopme n t pla n.

67Missoula, Montanaoctobu rT-20, ,980

Chairperson:Thomas R. Aidala, AlA,Arc h i tect/ Urban Desig ne r,San Francisco, CA

Team Members.'Sam J. Burns, ConventionCenter Manager,Sacramento, CARoger Holtman, LandscapeArchitect,Ealtimore, MDNorman Kondy, UrbanDesigner,San Francisco, CALa rry M a ttel, Tra n sportati onPlanner,Boise, lDErnest Neimi, UrbanEconomist/EconomicDevelopment S pec i a I i st,Eugene, ORThomas Burke Simmons,Urban Designer,Washington, D.C.

Population approx. 7O,OOOfi 980)Visit reguested by theMissoula City Spirit FaciliilesCommittee.Evaluate the feasibility ofdeveloping a shared facility forathletics and recreation, finearts, and conventions.

68Rockford, llllnoisDecembcr 5-8, ,980

Chairperson:James W, Christopher, AlA,Arch itect/ U rba n Desi g ne r,Salt Lake City, UT

Team Members:Richard A. BeattqTra n s port at i o n Pla n n e r,

Boston, MAJohn W Cuningham, AlA,Architect/UrbanDesigner/Developer,Minneapolis, MNDale Henson, UrbanEconomist/UrbanDevelopme nt S pec i a list,Atlanta, GADonald E. Moore, DowntownAssoc iation E xec u tive,Brooklyn, NYAndrew D, Seidel, Ph.D.,Urbart Sociologist,Arlington, TXJerry A. Webman, Ph.D.,Political Scientist,Princeton, NJCharles B. Zuckeo UrbanDesigner/ Fu nd i n g Assoc i ati on,Administrator,Washington, DC

Populatian approx. I 40,A00(1980)Visit requested by theN orth e rn I ll i nois C ha pte r/AlAand the Rockford Departmentof C om m u n ity Developm ent.Evaluate the recent history andcurrent problems ofRockford's central city in orderto fo rm u late reco m m end a tion sthat identify feasible objectivesand outline realistic courses ofaction toward achievement ofthose goals.

69Scattlc, WashingtonMay l-4,1981

Chairperson:Jules Gregory, FAIA,Arc h itect / U rba n De s i gner,Princeton, NJ

Team Members:Charles Davis, AlA,Arc h itect / H ou si ng Spec ia list,San Francisco, CAJohn Desmond, FAIA,Arc h itect/ Urba n Desi g n er,Baton Rouge, LAFrank S. Fish, AICP, UrbanPlanner,New York, NYGeorge Grier, UrbanSociologist,Bethesda, MDJohn Herman, LawyerlUrbanDevelopm ent S pec i a I is t,Minneapolis, MNJ. Lee Sammons, AICP,Urban Economist,Denver, CO

Population approx. 565,0O0t1981)Visit requested by the SeattleChapter/AlA and the City ofSeattle.E xplore th e opportu n i ties,constraints, and implicationsof downtown living in Seattle.

70Stochon, Callfornhfrlay 15-18, l98l

Chairperson:Mort Karp, AlA,Arch itect/ U rba n DesignEducator,Fayetteville, AR

Team Members:Franklin D. Eecker, Ph.D.,E n viron menta I S oc iologist,Ithaca, NYHarold K. Bell, UrbanE c on o m i st / Arc h ite c tu ra IEducator,New York, NYMichael C. Cunningham,Ph.D. AlA, Architect/UrbanDesigner,New York, NYGeorge Dickie, ASLA,Landscape Architect,Washington, DCSaundra Graham, ElectedOfficial,Cambridge, MABarbara Ross, Lawyer/GrowthM an agement S pecial ist,Chicago, lL

0981)Visit requested by the SierraValley Chapter/AlA, and theCity of Stockton.Examine the social, economicand physical problemsassociated with a decliningcentral core and recommendaction to aid revitalizationof the area.

7'San Eernardino, CalilonieOctober 9- r 2, ,98,

Chairperson:Charles F. Redmon, AlA,Arc h itect / U rba n Des ig ner,Cambridge, MA

Team Members:J.C. Boyd, UrbanDevel opment Assoc ia t i onE xec uti ve / E lec tor O fficia l,

Wichita Falls, TXPhilip B. Caton, AICP, UrbanPla n ner/ H ou s i n g S pec ia I i st,Trenton, NJBennie M. Gonzales, FAIA,Arc h i tec t / U rba n De si g ner,Scottsdale, AZJacguelyn H. Hall,Ne igh borh ood De ve lopme n tSpecialist/EconomicDeve lopm ent S pec t a lt stAtlanta, GAM. Dale Henson, UrbanEconomist/UrbanDe ve lo pm ent S pec ia I i s t,Atlanta, GA

Lawrence Kutnicki,Archi tec t / Urban Des igner,New York, NYErnest R. Munch, AlA,Architect/UrbanDesig n er / T ran s portat io nPlanner,Portland, OR

Population approx. I 02,OO0( 1 970)Visit requested by lnlandChapter/AlA and the CityRevita I iza tion C om m i ttee.To define the city's overallimage and to makerec om m endation s for th e

de ve lop m e nt an d preservat ionof the downtown core.

72Lynn MassacruseftsJan.28-Fcb. l. 1982

Chairperson.Charles Davis, AlA,Arc h itec t / H ou s in g S pec i a I i st,San Francisco, CA

Team Members:Harold K. Bell, UrbanEc o n o m i s t /Arc h i te c t u ra /Educator,New York, NYJohn P. Clarke, AIA/AICP,Arc h itect / U rba n Des ig n er,Trenton, NJCharles F. Harper, AlA,Architect/DowntownAss oc iat io n S pec ia I i st,Wichita Falls, TXRick Kuner, AICP,Tra ns portation Pla n ne r,Chicago, lLPhyllis M yers, Ne i g h borh oodDevel opm ent Spe c ial i st,Washingrcn, DC

Population approx. 78,O00( / 980)Visit requested by the BostonSociety of Architects/AlA anda public /private non-profitcorporaion, "Step Up WithLynn. "Following a devastatingdowntown fire, the city soughtguidance in rebuilding,defining its special character,and inventorying its stock ofsolid buildings. The team alsorecommended shapingalliances among the city,citizens, and the busrnesscommunity to begin reviewingavailable resources and toseek investments in thecommunity. (An earlier R/DATvisited Lynn in 1969 )

73Jackson Hole, WyomingMarch 19-22, 1982

Chairperson:Rai Y. Okamoto, FAIA/AICP,Arc h itec t/ Urba n Desig ner,San Francisco, CA

Team Members:Michael L. Horst, ResortDeve lopm e nt Spec ia I ist,Cambridge, MADinwiddie Lampton, Jr., LandOwner/Manager,Louisville, KYMalcolm A. Misuraca,Lawye r/G rowth Ma nagem entSpecialist,Santa Rosa, CAToby Arthur Ross, Ph.D.,EnvironmentalPla n ne r/G e ogra ph er/ Reg i o na IPlanner,Petaluma, CADennis M. Ryan, Ph.D., AICP,Urban Planner/UrbanDesigner/Urban DesignEducator,Seattle, WA

Population approx. 9, 344( I 980)Visit requested by theWyoming Chapter/AlAAdjacent to one of thecountrY's greatest scenic andrecreational attractions, thecity was concerned aboutha phaza rd growt h, pa rtic u I a rlythe development of vacationand second home subdivisionson prime scenic and rangeland. The team responded byanalyzing patterns of growthfor the remaining open land inthe valley and recommendingprocedures to deal withdevel opm e nt press u res.

74Healdsburg, CaliforniaOctobet 8-r 1. ,982

Chairperson:R. Terry Schnadelbach,ASLA, Landscape Architect,New York, NY

Team Members:William Lamont Jr., AICP,Urban Planner,Boulder, COErnest Niemi, UrbanEconomist/EconomicDe ve lopmen t S pec ia list,Eugene, ORDavid Stea, Ph.D.,E nvi ron me nb I / S oc i ol og ist /Arc h itectu ra I Educator,Milwaukee, WlMilo H. Thompson, AlA,Arch itec t /Urban Desig n er,Minneapolis, MNRaymond A. Trujillo, AlA,Architect,Albuquerque, NM

Population approx. 7,OO0Visit requested by the City ofHealdsburgThe team was asked to assistthe community in its effort tounderstand and deal withseve ra I si g ni f ic a nt econ om ictrends and critical planningrbsues. R ecom m enda ti onswere made to respond to thesein ways that take advantage ofthe opportunities offered butwithout sacrificing the city'ssmall rcwn character andquality of life.

75Frunklin, VirginiaApril l5-18, 1983

Chairperson:Sinclair Black, AlA,

A rc h itec t /A rc h it e c t u ra IEducator,Austin, TX

Team Members:Charles Brewer, AlA,Architect/UrbanDesi gn er/A rc h it ec t u ra IEducator,Co/umbus, OHG iorgio C avaglie ri, FAI A,Arc h itec t / H istoric Preservati onSpecialist,New York, NYKenneth Danter, UrbanEconomist/Real EstateDevelopment Spec ia/istColumbus, OHLarry Gibson, ASLA,Lan dsca pe Arc h itect / U rba nDesigner,Aurora, COLane Johnson, Ph.D.,Geographer,Swarthmore, PAAvis C. Vidal, AICP, UrbanPla n ner/ Plan n i ng Educ a tor,Cambridge, MA

Population approx. 7, 3OOOVisit requested by theTidewater Chapter/AlA and theCity of Franklin.The team examined factorsaffecting t he com merc ia Iactivity s u rrou nd i ng M ainStreet in order to increase theapparent and real intensity ofdowntown use as theidentifiable business and socialcore of the city.

76Portland, OregonMay 6-9, 1983

Chairperson:Charles B. Zucker, UrbanDesi g ne r / Fu nd i ng Assoc i ationAdministrator,Washington, DC

Team Members:William B. Fleissig, UrbanDesigner,Eeverly Hills, CAM. Dale Henson, UrbanEconomist/EconomicDevel op m en t S pec ia I ist,Atlanta, GARussell V. Keune, AlA,Arc h i tect/ H i st ori c Pre se rvat i onSpecialist,Arlington, VARick Kuner, AICP,T ran s portatio n Pla n n e r,

Chicago, lLLawrence Kutnicki,Arc h i tect / U rban D es i g ne r,

New York, NYJames Pettinari, UrbanDesigner/WaterfrontDe ve lopm ent S pec ia I ist,Eugene, ORRobert Sommer, Ph.D.,EnvironmentalPsy c h o I o g i s t /A rc h it e ct u ra IEducator,Davis, CA

Population approx. 380, 000Visit requested by PortlandChaprer/AlA.The team assisted inevaluating the potentials of anolder ind u stri a I /wa reh o u searea northwest of the centralbusiness district anddeveloped options andrecommendations fortra n sporta t ion, com m e rc i a l,

industrial, andpreservat io n i m prove me nts.

77Newport Beach, CaliforniaJune lO-13, 1983

Chairperson:William G. Conway, UrbanEconomist/Real EstateDevel opm e nt S pec ia I ist,New York, NY

Team Members.Philip B. Caton, AICP, UrbanPla n ne r/ U rba n Developm e ntSpecialist,Trenton, NJAllen E. Gatzke, ASLA,Landscape Architect,Berkeley, CAThomas Laging, AlA.Arc h itect / U rba n D es i g nEducator,Lincoln, NEErnest R. Munch, AlA,Arc h itect/ U rba n Des ig ner,Portland, ORR. Marlin Smith,Lawye r/G rowth Manag em entSpecialist,Chicago, lLThomas J. Sykes, AlA,Arc h itect / U rba n Desig n e r,Margate, NJJ a cq ueli ne C la i re Vische r,Ph.D., EnvironmentalPsychologist,Ottawa, ON, Canada

Population approx. 65,3/ 2Visit requested by the OrangeCounty Chapter/AlA.The team studied an older,beach-oriented part of townand addressed traffic andparking problems, impact oftourists and visitors,redevel opme nt pre ssu res,restrictive zoning, landscarcity, and lack of overallcoordinated planning.

78Sarasota, FloridaNovember 4-7, 1983

Chairperson.Charles Davis, AlA,Arc h itect/ H o u si ng S pec iali st,San Francisco, CA

Team Members:E. Larry Fonts, AICP, UrbanPlanner/DowntownAs s oc iation E x ec utive,Atlanta, GAArnold D. Hirvela, PE, TrafficE n g i nee r/ Tra ns porta t ionPlanner,Alliance, OHMark Johnson, ASLA,Landscape Architect,Denver, COAlan Mallach, UrbanEc o nom is t / H ou s ing S pec i a I ist,Linwood, NJDaniel R. Mandelker,Lawye r/G rowt h M a nage mentSpecialist,St. Louis, MOTerry Stephens, A.IA,

Arc h itect / Urba n Desi g ner,San Francisco, CARonald A. Straka, FAIA,Arc h itec t / U rba n Des ig n er,Boulder, CO

Population approx. 39,0OOVisit requested by the City ofSarasota and the Gulf CoastChapter/AlA.The team analyzed the assersand development trends of thecity and formulated goals andi m plem e ntation strateg ies fo roverall land use anddevelopment including thec onve rsation a nd pla n neddevelopment of the bayfront,downtown, and neighborhoodrevitalization and the creationof a public/private partnershipfor implementation.

79Niagan Falls, New YorkApril 13-16, 1984

Chairperson:David Lewis, R I BA / FAI A /Al C P,

Arc h itect / U rba n Des i g ner,Pittsburgh, PA

Team Members:Kurt P. Alverson, TourismDevelopm e nt S pecia I i st,Annapolis, MDEric Ernstbergen ASLA, LandPla n ne r/ La ndscape Arc h itect,Muncie, lNJules Gregory, FAIA,Arc h itect / Urba n Desig ne r,

Princeton, NJMichael L. Horst, ResortDevelopm e nt Spec ia list,San Fransisco, CASu mner M yers, Tra n s portati onPlanner,Washington, DCPatrice Yager Nelson,Economic DevelopmentSpecialistPhiladelphia, PAtuter Sollogub, AlA,Arc h itec t / U rban Designe r,

Cambridge, MA

Population approx. 90,0O00 980)Visit requested by the City ofNiagara Falls.With a declining industrialbase but located at one of thenatural wonders of the world,the city requested assistancein identifying its uniqueopportunities, capitalizing onthe economic potential of thetourism industry, anddevelopi ng a n i m plem entationstrategy for both economicand neighborhoodrevitalization, A concurrentprogram of the Ontario Societyof Arc h i tec t s (C om m u n ityAssist for an Urban StudyE ffort - CAUS E ) was worki ngwith the city of Niagara Falls,Ontario, thus allowing ani nternati ona I e xc ha nge ofinformation andrecommendations.

80Tucson, Artzonafr1ev 17-21

Chairpersons:Robert T. Nahas, DevelopeLCastro County, CACharles Redmon, A,IA,

Arc h itect /Urba n Designe4Cambridge, MA

Team Members:Norman H. Christeller,Reg iona I Planner/ Urba nDevel opm e nt Ad m i n ist ra to r,

Silver Spring, MDWilliam R. Eager, Ph.D.,Tra n s porta t i o n Pla n n e r,

Seattle, WA

Gary Hack, Ph.D., AICP,U rban Pla n ner/ U rban Desig nelCambridge, MAfuter Hasselman, FAIA,Arch itect / Urba n Desi g ne r,

San Fransisco, CAJesus Hinojosa, AICP, UrbanPlanner,College Station, TXRobert M. O'Donnell,AICP/FASLA, LandPl a n n e r/ La nd s c ape Arc h i tec t,

Denver, COH. Pike Oliver, AICP, UrbanPl a n n e r/ D eve I o pe r, N ewport9each, CAGary M. Ryan, Ph.D., UrbanEconomist,New Brunswick, NJRobert O. Townsend, ElectedOfficial,San Bernardino, CA

Regi ona I popu lati on approx.500,ooo (1980)Visit requested by apu bl i c/ p ri vate n ot - for- pro fi torgnization, "TucsonTomorrow."With the prospect of rapidpopulation growth within adelicate desert environment,assrstance was requested toincrease the effectiveness ofcomprehensive planningprocess, to encourage the cityof Tucson and Pima County tocooperate more fully, toexplore innovativedevelopment and revitalizationstrategies, and to suggestways of protecting the fragiledesert ecology whileaccomodating future needs.This R/UDAT was the firstunited effort of the Urban Landlnstitute (ULl), through theirPanel Advisory Serviceprogram, and the AlA.

8lHowell, MichiganJune 15-18, 1984

Chairperson:Dennis Ryan, Ph.D., AICP,Urban Planner/UrbanDesigner/Urban DesignEducator,Seattle, WA

Team Members:James F. Baker, AlA, UrbanDesigner/Small TownSpecialist,MississippiState, MSJohn Desmond, FAIA,Arch itect/ Urban Desi g ner,Baton Rouge, LATom Foust, Urban DesignSpecialist,York, PAStephen Friedman, AICP,Urban Planner/UrbanEconomist,Chicago, lLMichael W. McDonald, CityM anage r / u rba n Deve lopmentAdministrator,Healdsburg, CABarbara Ross, Lawyer/G rowthM a nagem ent S pec ia list,Chicago, lLBe rt Swa nson, S oc i ologist,Gainesville, FL

Population approx. 5,OO0fi 980)Visit requested by the HowellArea Chamber of Commerce.Facing a combination ofdeclining population,in c reasin g ma rket co m pet ition,a nd indu strial u nem ploym ent,the com m u nity req u estedassistance in planning fordowntown revitalization,ide nti fyi ng i m plemen ta t ionstrategies 0ncludingcom petitive marketing ), andmanagement of change.

82San Fnncisco, CAOctobcr l1-r5, ,984

Chairperson:John P Clarke, AIA/AICP,Arch itect / Urban Design er,Trenton, NJ

Team Members:Joseph Berridge, UrbanPlanner,Toronto, ONJames Braman, AICP,U r ba n / Tra n s parta t i o n Pl a n n e cSeattle, WAEric L. Ernstberger, ASLA,La ndsca pe Arc hitect / LandPlanner,Muncie, lNJohn Andrew Gallery, AlA,Arc h itect / U rban DevelopmentAdministrator,Philidelphia, PAJohn R. Hunt, AlA,Arc hitect/ Urban Desig ner,Seattle, WAMichael Kwartler, AlA,Arch itect / U rban Des ig n er,New York, NYWeiming Lu, AICP, UrbanPlanner/DowntownAssociation ExecutiveDevelopment,SI, PauI, MNJohn fustier,J o u rn a I i st /Arc h ite ct u ra I C ri t i c,Los Angeles, CA

Population approx. 7,OOO,OOOVisit requested by the SanFrancisco Chapter/AlA and theCity of San Francisco.The area south of MarketStreet, adjacent to the city'scentral business district, ischaracterized by lightindustrial, non-retailc o m m erc i a l, tra n s portat i on,and housing uses. Pressures toexpand the intensiveo f fi c e/c om m erc i a I c h a racte r ofthe downtown into the area ina piecemeal fashion werereviewed by the team andrec om m endati ons wre rc m adethat addrcssed this issuercviatnd poposeddevelopment projects, andsuggested more sensitivealternatives. ln particular, theteam focussed on definingedge conditions, humanizingthe waterfront, controllingoffice/c om merci a I ex pansion,and working with indigenousresidents and land uses.

83Albcqueryue, New lllexicoNovcmbu rs-16, ,984

Chairperson:Clifford W Graves, AICP,Urban Planner/CountyAdministratocSan Diego, CA

Team Members:Michael A. Dobbins, AlA,Arch itect / U rban DesignAdministrator,Birmingham, ALCreig Halvorson, ASLA,Landscape Architect,Boston, MARick Kuner, AICP,Tra n s porta t i o n Pl a n n e r,

Chicago, lLW Kirby Lockard, FAIA,Arch itect / Urban De s ig nEducator,Tuscon, AZJohn Stebbins, AlA,Arc h itect/ Urba n Designer,Cambridge, MALouis Viramontes, AlA,Arc h i tec t / H i st o ri c Pre s e rva t i o nSpecialist,San Antonio, TX

fopulation approx. 3O0,OO0Visit requested by theAlbequ erque C h apter/AlA a ndthe CitV of Albeguerque.Central Avenue, or "old" Route66, has long the main street ofAlbequerque linking activitynodes which include thefa i rg ro u n ds, u n i ve rs ity,downtown, and historic OldTown. The purpose of theR/UDAT visit was to upgradethe physical appearance andperceptual image of traditionalcorridor through the city.

84Garlsbad, New MexicoNovembor ,5-19, 1984

Chairperson:James W. Christopher, FAIA,Arc h i tectl U rba n Des ign er,salt Lake city, uT

Team Members:James E. Bock, AICP, UrbanPla n ner/ Urban DevelopmentSpecialist,Houston, TXAlice Gray, EconomicDe ve I op m e n t Ad m i n i stra to r,Boston, MACharles Harper, AIAArc hitect / Elected Official,Wichita Falls, TXJames M. O'Neal, AlA,Architect/GrowthM an age ment S pec ia li st,Denver, COJoe Stubblefield, AlA,A rc h i t ect / H i stori c Pre se rva t i o nSpecialist,San Antonio, TXJoel H. Sach+Lawyer/G rowth M a nagem entSpecialist,White Plains, NYAvis C. Vidal, AICP, UrbanPla nner/ Pla nning Educ ator,Boston, MA

Population approx. 3O,OOOVisit requested by the city ofCarlsbad.Carlsbad is an isolatedcommunity long dependent onlocal extractive industries.Recently, it has grown as atourism, agri-business, andreilrement center. The erosionof basic industry and theuntapped potential of tourismwere the fhe rssues faced bythe team andrecommendations were madefor downtown revitalization,residential area upgrading, andtourism development.

85Anderson, lndianaMarch 8-ll, ,985

Chairperson: David Stea,Ph.D., EnvironmentalS o c i o I o g i s t /A rc h i t e c t u ra IEducator,Santa Fe, NM

Team Members:W. Russell Ellis, Ph.D.,EehavioralS c i e n t i s t /A rc h i t e c t u ra IEducatorBerkley, CAMichael E. Gleason, Ph.D.,fo I i tic al S cie ntist / Pu bl icAdm i nistrati on E ducator,Bloomington. lNAlex Herrera,Historic PreservationAd m i n i s t ra t o r/A rc h i t e c t u ra IHistorian,New York, NYDwight Hoover, Ph D.,

Histonan/local HistorySpecialist,Muncie, lNGary C. Johnson, AlA,Arch itect/ U rba n Desi g ner,Cambridge, MAVictor Walker, ASLA,Landscape Architect,Belmont, MARobert Coldwell Wood, Ph.D.,Urban DevelopmentAd m i n i st rato r/ Po I it i c a IScientist,Middletown, CT

Population approx. 65,000Visit requested by the MadisonCounty Council ofGovernments.A medium sized industrial cityAnderson was hit hard by theeconomic shifts of the 1970's.With conditions improving (ifnot rebounding) in the l98O's,community bettermentbecame the issue. The R/UDATfocused on improvement of the7t/z mile White River corriderthat winds through severalresidential areas and thec entral bus i ness distric t.

Recommend ation s i nc lu dedimproving the river as arec reati on al and vi sua Ia m e n i tyr, h i storic p re serva t io nwithin the downtown andadjacent older neighborhoods,and working more closely withcitizen organizations and theminority community.

86Bct hel lsla nd, C a lilo rniaJunc 2l-24, 1985

Chairperson:Junius J. Champeaux, FAIA,Arc h itect /U rba n Desig ner,Lake Charles, LA

Team Members:David W. Ames, Developer,Hilton Head lsland, SCStanley Keniston, AlA,Arc h itec t / E ne rgy S pe c i a I ist,San Diego, CADavid E. Lourie, PE,

Geotechnic Engineer,Westlake, LARichard Madsen, Ph.D.,E nvi ron m e n ta I Sociolog ist,San Diego, CA

Alan Mallach, UrbanEc onom i st/ H ou sing S pecia I ist,Roosevelt, NJ

Area population approx. 2,400Visit requested by the Eethellsland Area,4ssociation.Located on a riverine islandwith severe geological andhyd rol og i c a I c on stra i nts todeve lopment, t h e com m u nityof Bethel lsland wasconcerned with growthmanagement ande nvi ro n m en ta I c on se rva t i ontechniques and the planningprocess necessary to developand implement these.Recommendations fordeve I o pm e n t sta n d a rd s,

incorporation alternatives, andan areawide planwere presented.

87Jacksonville, FloridaSeptemher 26-30, ,985

Chairperson:Charles Zucker, UrbanDesi g ne r/ Fu nd i ng As s oc i a t i o nAdministrator,Washington, DC

Team Members:Leopold Adler, ll, HistoricPreservat ion S pec i a li st,Savannah, GACharles A. Alden, ASLA,La n dsc a pe A rc h ite c t / La n dPlanner,Miami, FLJames Greenburg, AlA,Arc h itect/ E ne rgy C on servationSpecialist,Princeton, NJM. Dale Henson, UrbanEconomist/EconomicD ev/opm en t Specla/ist/ RealEsta te Developm e nt S pec ia I ist,Atlanta, GA

Michael E. Johnson, AlA,Architect/Real EstateDevelop men t Spec ia I i st,Atlanta, GAJames Mills,H u m a n Services Pla n ne r,

St. Petersburg, FLMichael John Pittas, Hon.AlA, Urban Designer/UrbanDesign EducatocLos Angeles. CAArthur Skolnik. AlA,Arch itect/ H i storic Prese rvati onSpecialist,San Diego, CA

Popoulation approx. 540,OOOVisit requested by theJacksonville ChaPter AIA and a

c oa I iti on of organ i zatio nsrepresen t i n g the SPri ngfie ldneighborhood.The R/UDAT focused onrevita I i za ti on issues be i ngfaced by the neighborhood ofSpringfield - a historic suburband now a part of the city ofJacksonville - locatedadjacent to the city's centralbusiness district.Rec om me ndai on s we re m adefor neighborhoodorga n izat i ons, h i stori cpreservation, housingre ha bi I itat ion a n d c om m erc i a Irevitalizailon for this raciallyi n tegra ted low/ m oderateincome neighborhood.

88Boise,ldahoOctober 1l-r4, ,985

Chairperson:Charles Davis, AlA,Arc h itect / U rba n De s ig n e r,

San Francisco, CA

Team Members:Richard Eeatty, TransportationPlanner,Newburyport, MAFrank Gray, Urban Planner,Bouldet COThomas Laging, AlA,Arc h itect / U rba n Des ig nEducator,Lincoln, NETheodore A. Monacelli, AlA,Arc h itect / U rba n Desig n e r,

Cambridge, MAReginald Owens, AICP, UrbanPla n ner/ Urba n E conom i st,Tempe, AZWilliam S. Sas/ow, Developer,Denver, CO

Populailon approx. 103,000Visit requested by the Centralldaho Section/AlA and the Cityof Boise.The largest city in ldaho, Boisewas in search of its identity,sense of place, and purpose.Past efforts to revitalize thecentral business district bybuilding a regional shoppingcenter downtown werethwarted by suburbandevelopment. Theredeve lopm ent cha llen ge a ndcontinuing community needswere addressed by the R/UDATas was the issue of fragmentedcommunity factions.Recommendations were madethat will encourage a processfor the economica//y realisticredevelopment of the thecentral area with business,entertainment, andrecreational opportunities thatwill provide the missing senseof c om m u n ity deve lopmen t.

89Generic R/UDALSan Fnncisco, CAOctobcr rT-20, 1985

Chairperson:9en H. Cunningham, AlA,Arc h itect / Urba n Designer.Houston, TX

Team Members:Robert Calthorpe, AlA,Arc h i tect / E nergy C on se rva tionSpecialist,Sausilito, CAW. Paul Farmer, AICP, UrbanPlanner,Pittsburgh, PAfuter M. Hasselman, FAIA,Arc h itect / U rba n Desi g ner,San Francisco, CARobert lssacson, PE, CivilE ng i nee r/ N eigh borh oodActivist,San Francisco, CADavid N. Lewis,FAIA/AICP/RIBA,Arc h itect / U rba n De s ig ner,Pittsburgh, PAWilliam F. Masterson, UrbanEconomist/Real EstateDevel opm en t S pec i a I i st,Los Angeles, CADavid A. Oleson,Real Estate DevelopmentS pec ia I i st / Ra i I road La n dsSpecialist,Denvec COBelinda Orling, UrbanDesi gn er/ Railroad La n dsSpecialist,San Francisco, CAJ. Lee Sammons, AICP, UrbanEconomist/Real EstateDeve lop m ent S pec ia I ist,Denver, COCarl Stein, AlA,

Arc h i tec t / E n e rg y C o n se rva t i o nSpecialist,New York, NYRonald A. Straka, FAIA,Arc h itect/ U rba n Desi g ne r,Denver, COStephen Townsend, UrbanDesigner,San Franciscq CAGeorge A. Williams,Lawyer/Urban Planner,San Franciscq CA

This is a first of a new series ofroundtable programs that usethe techniques of a R/UDAT toaddress issues that arecommon, or generic to manyurban areas throughout theUS. The topic of this effort wasthe reuse of center citynilrcad lands: an opportunityfor energy efficient design.Funding to convene the teamand to publish the report wasmade available by the AIA andthe US Department of Energy.

Biographies of the Editors:

Peter Batchelor is a member of the AmericanInstitute of Architects and the American Instituteof Certified Planners. He holds an undergraduate

degree from the University of British Columbia,and graduate degrees in Architecture and CityPlanning from the University of Pennsylvannia.

He has taught at both those universities and is

currently a Professor of Urban Design at the

School of Design, North Carolina State

University, in Raleigh. He has published widely

in the field of urban design since 1963 and his

twenty years of professional practice includes a

full range of projects in the field of housing and

urban development. He currently lives in Raleigh,

North Carolina, where he teaches graduate

students at the School of Design and directs

Townscape, an urban design consulting practice.

David Lewis is a Fellow of the American Instituteof Architects, a member of the AmericanInstitute of Certified Planners, and a member ofthe Royal Institute of British Architects. He holds

undergraduate and graduate degrees from theCollege of Art, Leeds England. He has been TheAndrew Mellon Professor of Architecture and

Urban Design at Camegie Melton University and

The William Henry Bishop Visiting Professor at

Yale University. He is a distinguished author inthe field of art and architecture, and has chairedmany signifigant professional associations andcommittees. He is a founder and paftner of UrbanDesign Associates in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvannia.

His current practice covers a full range ofbuildings and urban design projects and is knownfor its emphasis on citizen participation in theplanning and design process.

Acknowledgments

The Student PublicationThe Student publication of the School of Designat North Carolina State University was

established in 1951 as a memorial to architectMatthew Nowicki, Head of the Department ofArchitecture from 1948 to 1950. For over thirty-five years, issues have addressed a variety of topicsin the fields of architecture, landscapearchitecture, urban design, product design, andvisual and graphic design. In addition to the workof students and faculty of the School of Design,the publication has published or documentedwork of this ena's leading professionals such as:

I-e Corbusier, Alvar Alto, Louis Kahn,Paulo Soleri, Harwell Harris, Charles Eames,

James Fitch, Buckminster Ful[er, Pier Lligi Nervi,Eduardo Catalano, Duncan Stuaft,Amos Rapaport, and Kenneth Cnaik.

The Student Publication is organized and staffedentirely by students from different departmentswithin the school. The editors are encouraged tocontinue a tmdition of relavance and quality indetermining the contents of each issue, but are

otherwise unrestricted. Working with theassistance of the faculty advisor of their choice,the staff prepares the material for printing,distribution, and maintains an intemationalmailing list. Financial suppon is provided by thesale of issues, grants, and donations: Benefactors,

$100 per year, Patrons, $50 per year, and Donors,$20 per year. The Student Publication is nolonger available by subscription. Issues are

announced when they are ready and advertised.For further information or a listing ofback issues contact:The Student Publication of the School of DesignNorth Carolina State UniversityP.O. Box 7701Raleigh, North Carolina 27 695 -7 7 0l

Volume ?9 was set in Goudy and Univers at rheSchool of Design on their Compugraphic MCS10/8400. The text is 70 pound Patina Matte bythe S.D. Warren Co. The printing and halftoneswere executed by Hunter Publishing Company;\U7inston-Salem, North Carolina.

StaffRichard C. Hall, Business ManagerBruce W. !7hipple, Business Editor, Design Editor,Book Design and Typography

Jeanette Hodge, Vera Gregory andWilliam K. Bayley, Production AssistantsClaude McKinney, Dean; Winifred Hodge;Peter Batchelor; hculty Advisors

Considerable thanks are due to Jane WilleboonJse

who was both the Business Manager and Business

Editor of Volume 29 until May 1985. Jane helpedto create the linkage between the AIA and TheStudent Publication in December 1983 andsupervised the development of the publication forthe next year-and-a-half. [t was during that periodthat the manuscript went through majormodifications before evolving to its present form.

Special thanks to Bruce Kriviskey, Director ofUrban and R/UDAI Programs at the AIA, forediting and proofing of the appendix and frontmatter and his pafticipation and guidance incoordinating the final manuscript.

Thanks to William K. Bayley, director of theMedia Center, for his assistance and patience intypesetting and technical instruction involved inproduction of this book. Also thanks to RichardHendel, Designer for the University of NorthCarolina at Chapel Hill Press, for his adviceand guidance.

Photo CreditsAbend, Singleton Associates [ncorporatedBJSS Architects/PlannersPeter BatchelorCambridge Seven AssociatesCity of Healdsburg, CalifomiaCity of h.,n, Massachusetts

Jerome R. Emst, TRA Associates

Jules Gregory

Jeffrey Muir HamiltonThe Historic Preservation Foundationof North CarolinaThe Historical Society of PennsylvanniaDavid kwisRobin C. MooreOlympia Development Downtown AssociationCharles RedmonHenry SanoffRon Thomas

Jim and Clark Wilson\UUoollen, Molzon, and Partners

The majority of the photographs were reprintedfrom negatives by Bill Touchberry PhotographyStudios in Raleigh, North Carolina.

All sketches and other drawings were taken ftrom

actual R/UDAT repofts prepared and published

in the field.

tr -Brl - rAm - NCModernist

Documents

f33€ - bilkent. edu. tr

RAM (LUX) SYSTEMATIC FUNDS - TeleTrader.com

RAM FINAL MRP

TR-500XL-4 - Tadano

g+ftsr,tr @

NILAM RAM - Population Research Institute

3GPP TR 25.922

Ram Pickup - Regulations.gov

iBE'*tr' - Cg Health

RAM Vehicle Laptop Mounts - motogps.it

TR Körük, Havali süspansiyon

TR-144 - Broadband Forum

RAVI KANT RAM - S3waas

GM - TR GM - VX - AB - CCS - TR - VX - AB - CCS - Coolblue

Prabandhan Guru - Shri Ram College

RAM (LUX) SYSTEMATIC FUNDS - Fundsquare

CEN/TR 15193-2

BITCOIN TR

Bilişim Sözlüğü En -Tr

Turkcell TR 2013