DOT's as Placemakers! - Mike Krusee, CNU Scott Polikov, AICP, CNU

Minneapolis

DOT’s as Placemakers!
      Mike Krusee, CNU
   Scott Polikov, AICP, CNU
             April 28, 2009
         Gateway Planning Group, Inc.

Prologue

Former Chairman of the House Transportation Committee, Texas Legislature,
Mike Krusee oversaw TxDOT and supported big road building for the Governor

Act 1, Scene 1

A colleague of Krusee’s on the Austin MPO representing his transit authority,
Scott Polikov sowed the seeds for his friends epiphany, taking Chairman Krusee to
 meet with Andres Duany in the Kentlands and the leadership from Arlington, Va.

Krusee began to study the failing economic assumptions that are
pulling the current transportation system down onto its last leg

Why is the system failing?
• The gas tax provides capital for building road; but what about maintenance?

• The article of faith always has been that gas demand is inelastic to price

Act 1, Scene 2

“The days when we were just building sprawl
forever, those days are over.”
                  - President Obama, February 10, 2009

           Permission granted!

.… So Secretary LaHood and Secretary Donovan get married

“The world is flat”
     - Thomas Friedman

“No, the world is spiky”
            - Richard Florida

Act 2, Scene 1

The challenge-
Creating places that support
• Investments in higher education        Verano Plan by
                                         Gateway Planning Group
• Making your town attractive and cool   and Pate Engineering

                                         Campus Plan
• Alternatives to highways and malls     courtesy of
                                         Marmon Mok/Sasaki

Act 2, Scene 2

Now on the CNU National Board, Krusee invites CNU President John Norquist
 to Texas to meet with the TxDOT Commission appointed by the Governor

Disarming the TxDOT Commission,
Norquist literally stuns them with the facts

He pointed out that the old regime couldn’t be sustained…

… and that the walls literally will come down

Norquist demonstrated how it could be done differently

Downtown Seoul before CSS

Same corridor after CSS

Same corridor after CSS

A happy Mayor, who became President

Afterwards, TxDOT Commission Chairman Ric Williamson
     asks Krusee and Polikov “what do you want me to do?”

They asked Williamson to create a committee to reform the state’s
      project development process to incorporate urbanism

Act 3, Scene 1

TxDOT

 Chairman Williamson appoints Polikov co-chair along with Mark Marek,
head of TxDOT’s Design Division and former co-author of the AASHTO
  “Green” Book. Marek agrees with Polikov that urbanism is the key.

What is urbanism?

“…places that
encourage unplanned
contact with other
people.”
      -Milosav Cekic
       Gateway Planning Group

So how do we get from here to there?

We must understand the evolution of roads and retail,
 providing insight into our ability to regain urbanism

Act 3, Scene 2

© Seth Harry & Assocs., Inc.

The Downtown Department Store

© Seth Harry & Assocs., Inc.

The “Bypass” Mall

© Seth Harry & Assocs., Inc.

© Kaptain Krispy Kreme

The Regional Mall

This trend resulted in designing strictly for peak traffic events.

But what about the people?

The key is focusing on form over use

The street form accommodates evolving uses,
creating a sustainable neighborhood.

                                         © Polikov

Sustaining value, not just cash flow, is the new business model

Conventional Development

 • single use pods of development
 • buffers instead of transitions
 • lack of a transportation network
 • not pedestrian-friendly,
   so not transit-friendly
 • narrowly stratified market
 • planned obsolescence, so constructed accordingly
 • scrape, rezone and sometimes re-subdivide to redevelop
 • value drops when the original use is no longer viable

Neighborhood Development

 • mixed use
 • transitions instead of buffers
 • a network of transportation,
   encouraging choice
 • easy to walk
 • broad market (age, socio-economic, race, lifestyle)
 • planned to endure
 • change of use often times instead of redeveloping
 • value holds when the current use is no longer viable

Act 3, Scene 3

A partnership of the ITE and the Congress for the New Urbanism

Slides courtesy of Jim Daisa of Kimley Horn

Slides courtesy of Jim Daisa of Kimley Horn

Slides courtesy of Jim Daisa of Kimley Horn

Convinced the ITE Manual for Walkable Urban Thoroughfares
captures the linkage between land use and transportation, the
   TxDOT Committee moved onto reforming the process

The current process (not just TxDOT, but typical for every state)
1. What is future mobility need for a particular roadway corridor?

2. What functional classification (how many more lanes) accommodates this need?

3. Is there money to pay for the project?

4. Hold public meetings per NEPA (“design – defend”)

5. Final design, letting and construction

The days of just modeling travel demand are over
Revised TxDOT Project Development Process Manual
[revisions in italics]

Subsection 1000
“For urban projects, particularly capacity improvements, the need for a project
may be determined from traffic modeling of future travel demands as well as
from the need for a sustainable street and transit network associated
with the potential project in the context of desired land uses and urban
design established in regional plans …neighborhood plans, other local
plans …public-private partnerships or economic development plans.”

Subsection 1330
The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the Congress for the
New Urbanism (CNU) have developed … context sensitive design
[processes and criteria] for streets, intersections, and networks…. Those
resources … shall provide guidance for the CSS process.

Act 3, Scene 4

DOT reforms support utilyzing urbanism
     for economic development

A case study

An assessment of local assets forming the basis for a new master plan

The Master Plan and a reinvented Main Street

Master plan, regulating plan and implementing form-based code

Build Out (20 years at 5-Year Phasing Periods)
                                Phase 1   Phase 2   Phase 3   Phase 4
New retail in mixed use (sqf)    36,000    51,250   230,250    46,500
New retail in live/work (sqf)    23,400    14,400         0         0
Town homes (units)                  109         0         0         0
Live/work (units)                    39        20         0         0
Office (sqf)                     28,625    25,625   111,875    15,125
New lofts (units)                   115        96       132        65

Annual fiscal impact at buildout—financing for Main Street
Existing Value:        Property       Property Tax    Retail        Sales Tax     Total Tax
$48,206,147              Value         Revenue         Sales        Revenue       Revenue

Existing + Phase 1     $101,484,897       $370,820    $11,880,000     $237,600      $608,420

Existing + Phase 1-2   $132,156,147       $584,292    $25,010,000     $500,200    $1,084,492

Existing + Phase 1-3   $200,634,897      $1,060,904   $71,060,000    $1,421,200   $2,482,104

Existing + Phase 1-4   $218,328,647      $1,184,053   $80,360,000    $1,607,200   $2,791,253

Resulting increased revenue stream will provide debt service for redesign
and reconstruction of Main Street under vision of the form-based Master Plan

Epilogue

Main Street Today

Mixed use theatre on Main Street after CSS redesign now underway.

Increased urbanism through State DOT reforms
will be critical in solving the climate change challenge.

www.gatewayplanning.com
  scott@gatewayplanning.com
            512.451.4098

       Copyright Gateway Planning Group