In an interview with PBS's Blueprint America, Rep. Jim Oberstar discusses the current state of transit policy in the U.S., his theory on how that policy needs to be reformed, and how his Surface Transportation Authorization Act of 2009 would help steer the country in that direction.
I appreciate that Rep. Oberstar recognizes that land use and growth should drive transit development rather than the opposite. Though his bill deals specifically with transit funding and planning, the fundamental principle he seems to advocate is a comprehensive analysis of all aspects of proposed urban or suburban development. A common pattern in the U.S. today is for a new road to be built first, and development around that road comes later. This generally promotes piecemeal, spotty development. Such an approach really prevents planners from accurately projecting the needs of transit, utilities, and public services required for the development.
To me, Rep. Oberstar is promoting an approach that will strive, as much as possible, to get things right the first time. Comprehensive planning could help to avoid such problems like needing to retrofit a larger roadway or a rail system onto an area that is designed to accommodate it. Such planning relates to the sustainability of development. Are we promoting development that will be accessible, livable, and desirable for years to come? Or are we thinking only about capitalizing on opportunities in the short-term? Ideally, projects could be developed in a way that attempts to satisfy both the goals of attracting private investment and building a community that will become and remain a community rather than just another place on the map.
Did you by chance read the article in the Sunday Denver Post about co-tenancy clauses? It made me wonder if the current economic climate might cause some developers to think more from the perspective you advocate.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI did see that article. The situation described in Denver (see http://www.denverpost.com/ci_12912202) will force both developers and retail tenants to certainly think about the deals and conditions to which they are agreeing. This is also an issue that city and county planners must consider, whether are they awarding projects to reliable developers who will be able to retain clients and uphold the commercial profile of the particular community at issue.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Sarah, for the comment!