(Click on the photo for a larger image)
- Appropriate density w/rowhouses
- Quality architecture and urban design
- Front porches
- Short setbacks
- Beautiful ornamentation
- Designed to interact with people and not cars
- Bike Lanes
- Real Trolleys (aka Streetcars)
- No Curb Cuts/Driveways - On-street parking ONLY
It’s very straightforward - we could have this in Miami, too.
photo courtesy of freekpowerticket’s flickr account
How funny. I lived right around the corner from that photo of West Philly. I miss all those things about that city. It was really well planned and a very pleasant place to live for a pedestrian. Its actually more pedestrian friendly than car friendly.To be honest, I don’t see that happening in Miami any time soon. People just don’t think that way here.
I agree it is so important to have dynamic neighborhoods. Here we have buildings built out to the right of way. No lite rail lines, and no real bike lanes. It would be great to have a dynamic neighborhood like this in Miami.
Here is a link about separate bike lanes, it’s pretty informative.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONS2ptAR4mo
I agree with KCS.
I don’t see that happening in the near future in Miami. Actually the construction trends are completely opposite to that.
I would love to have that here too.
But here they’re building either skyscrapers or those horrible cookie cutter huge suburban developments full of disconnected streets, cul de sacs and no pedestrian ammenities whatsoever.
There are parts of South Beach that are comparable to that neighborhood in Philly. South Beach lacks some of the qualities mentioned including the setbacks, porches and streetcars but the density and urbanity are similar in a way.
Totally agree with the comparison but would want to make note that this does not exclude modernism. The same desired qualities could be achieved with modern building design. I guess the term ornamentation struck me as funny and I would consider calling it design excellence. Ornamentation is not a requirement.
Good points everyone.
KCS: I miss that area, too. I’ve spent a lot of time in UCity and Powelton Village over the years - just love it. You’re right, though, current planning policy throughout Miami-Dade objects to this type of urban environment.
Anon #1: Thanks for the link. I have actually wanted to post that video for quite sometime, but unfortunately Miami is so far behind we’re just trying to people THINKING about bikes first.
Anon #2: Your observations are correct, unfortunately. This is what happens when politicians cater to a citizenry with a car-obsessed culture.
Anon #3: That is exactly why SoBe is one of my top 2 or 3 favorite Miami neighborhoods. North Beach is very similar. These neighborhoods are truly urban, and generally speaking should be a model for the rest of Miami. Now you see just how asinine it is that BayLink is on the proverbial transit backburner. In fact, it’s almost unfathomable that is wasn’t constructed before Metrorail even. I guess it just made way too much sense.
Yeah I totally agree, James. I think Miami could have some really great neighborhoods with MiMo design provided that it followed traditional urban standards such as on this block in West Philly. You’d be achieving density, good urban design, a variety of housing types, and still doing it with a signature Miami style.
There’s no need for a false dichotomy between cars and the lack thereof. It’s entirely possible to let residents enjoy the best of both worlds… classically-inspired architecture, walkable streets, and a nice double garage to keep the cars safe so they won’t have to run outside with a gun every time they hear a car alarm going off somewhere…
Look here
you left out the retail.
Anon #4: Thanks for the pic, but I’m still going to have to disagree with you here. First of all, not having guaranteed parking is an important factor for facilitating walking and biking. If you’re going somewhere and you aren’t virtually guaranteed a parking space at the point of destination (or if it is appropriately priced high, as called for by parking scholar Shoup) or back at the point of origin, you will be much more likely to make the trip using other means opposed to dealing with the hassle. It’s like I mentioned in my “Park n’ Walk” post a few days ago - despite living in a very high density area, many people are still choosing to drive in downtown and Brickell because of guaranteed/easy/cheap parking at both the origin and destination. So, in turn, giving people free, guaranteed parking at their points of origin (i.e. their homes) will induce more driving.
It can also lead to urban design issues. In the picture above, these older buildings still dominate their respective frontages pretty well, given the presence of a garage door. However, in most other instances this would not be the case. Plus, this adds tons of unnecessary curb cuts to the sidewalk. If properly engineered, which often is tough to do due to years of wear and tear and cold weather in many places, sidewalks should remain at a uniform grade even across the curb cuts (driveways in this case). Unfortunately, what usually ends up happening is that the sidewalk ends up undulating, as on most Miami streets, creating a miserable second-rate pedestrian realm.
Even worse, people see their tiny driveway as a private space they can do whatever they want on, which often means leaving the car parked outside of the garage and on the sidewalk. So now if you’re walking down this street, you may be forced to deal with undulating sidewalks while having to avoid cars entering and exiting, plus having to walk into the road almost to get around cars parked on the sidewalk. I know it sounds picky, but this is the kind of thing that not only sends the message that your second-class by not driving, but also can be the tipping point for auto-centrism in many neighborhoods and cities.
I’ll agree to the extent that I firmly believe that if a rear alley is available, the garage should face it. HOWEVER… reality is never that neat and orderly. There are plenty of urban areas with narrow lots and no alleys. In those situations, the next best compromise is to require that the garage be at least partly depressed, and have its door set back far enough to allow one full car length between it and the sidewalk (so even a pair of Lincoln Navigators or Hummers parked side by side won’t encroach into the sidewalk).
Like it or not, people have cars. They use them. They want to be able to sleep at night knowing that the car alarm going off somewhere outside isn’t theirs. God forbid, if they use transit to get to work, they want to find their car intact when they get home… and will be ENRAGED if it’s not. And few things can match the horror and utter humiliation of having a friend’s car get broken into while they’re at your house.
If it upsets you that people drive 3 blocks in Brickell, look at it this way: would you rather have them live in west Kendall and drive 3 miles instead? This is America. You can’t beat people into submission and force them to live the way you want them to live. They WILL fight back, and they’ll usually win. In the long run, you’ll make a bigger positive difference by finding ways to create neighborhoods that are both walkable AND convenient to park in.
Which scenario do YOU think is more likely to make a positive difference in the long run?
a) Joe and Lisa, who live in Outer Suburbia, go to visit their friends Matt & Amy who live in an urban neighborhood where parking is scarce. They park a half block away, and go to their friend’s house. Later, they return to their Range Rover, and find a smashed window. They drive home, angry and thankful they live in a nice, safe gated neighborhood. They still go to see their friends occasionally, but they feel like they’re driving into Beiruit, and go running out the front door panicked & screaming every time they hear something that might be a car alarm.
b) Joe and Lisa, who live in Outer Suburbia, go to visit their friends Matt & Amy who live in a recently-rebuilt urban neighborhood where all the shiny new townhomes have double garages with faux-cobblestone driveways and halogen-floodlit driveways just large enough to accommodate two large SUVs side by side. They leave their car parked in the driveway, and head out with their friends to go walk somewhere. Unbeknownst to them, while they’re gone, the neighbor across the street notices the floodlights at their friend’s house come on, and sees someone whose appearance strongly suggests that he’s NOT supposed to be there. The neighbor flips the switch on the floodlights in HIS driveway, the suspicious guy across the street notices, and runs away. A few hours later, they all return home after having a great time. As they drive home on the freeway, Lisa remarks that she’d love to live in a neighborhood like that, even if it IS kind of expensive. Joe agrees, and they decide to go see a realtor on Monday.
Way to extrapolate a ridiculous scenario…want me to try one too?
LOL
Laugh if you want, but the truth is, when it comes to preventing car break-ins, the police are useless, impotent, and can’t do a damn thing. There’s exactly one dependable way to keep your car from getting broken into when it’s parked in any urban neighborhood: keep it locked inside a garage, so aspiring thieves will find a softer target and break into somebody else’s car instead.
Don’t underestimate how thoroughly demoralizing, disillusioning, and upsetting it is for someone who’s moved to an urban neighborhood to get their car broken into, let alone multiple times in a year. It’s obvious that most of you have never actually had your car broken into, or lived anyplace where it was a real daily possibility (hint: Kendall isn’t one of them *cough*). Get your car broken into some Thursday night, then spend an awful 95 degree humid August evening sitting and sleeping in it to keep it from getting stripped clean or stolen outright overnight, and you’ll understand why normal people think garages are so non-negotiably important.
or here is another scenario:
Scenario A) Bob and Suzy drive their gas guzzling SUV over to visit their friends who live in outer suburbia. The driveway is very well lit because it deters criminals. While in the house, a suspicious character comes along and breaks into their car and steals a random bag from the car. They did this in spite of the bright halogen lights pointed directly at the car and the numerous houses around the driveway with a clear view. This is because the neighbors heard a noise and didn’t want to have anything to do with it and went on with their lives.
Scenario B) Bob and Suzy live in a very urban environment with an efficient transit system and good urban design. They do not need to own a car and thus save lots of money, time, and effort. They walk places and are more healthy because of it. To travel more than a couple blocks, they take their transit passes and board whatever form of transit they want and go where they need to.
Scenario A actually happened to my brother and his family during one of their trips to the suburbs from out of town. Scenario B is very possible and very much favored over A.
Steven Gets “it”
You can dream about ‘B’ all you want… it’s not going to happen in Miami in our lifetimes. New York is the ONLY city in America that comes REMOTELY close to living up to your lofty ideals. Not even CHICAGO or SF is like that.
Go ahead… I DARE you to try and find a dozen people from either Chicago or SF who
a) live in a house or condo worth more than $800,000 (and presumably could afford to live just about anywhere they wanted to),
b) have at least one child,
c) don’t own a car,
d) genuinely don’t want a car,
e) don’t have a medical condition that makes driving unsafe or impossible,
f) don’t have a legal impediment to driving, and
g) aren’t deluded environmentalists who genuinely believe that their own lack of a car makes one whit of difference to the Earth’s future.
I’ll even cut you a break… if they’re a registered Republican, I’ll let you count them as FOUR people. I suspect you’ll still be looking for a really, really long time.
The point is, you’re wasting your time and hurting your own cause if you try to make it artificially hard/expensive for people who might consider moving into an urban neighborhood to hedge their bets and buy townhomes or condos with safe, secure garages big enough to hold all of their cars from day one.
Instead of bitterly complaining about how terrible they are for not enthusiastically divesting themselves of cars, be thankful they moved into the city in the first place, and take advantage of their new proximity to interest them in voluntarily using transit instead of driving. God forbid, rip out the first 5-10 rows of seats in Metrobuses, replace them with rows of 2+1 reclining leather bucket seats (separated from the smelly proles by a tastefully-etched glass panel), and restrict them to riders with “Gold” metropasses that cost 2-4x as much as normal ones (increasing revenue AND rewarding passengers who buy monthly passes they’re likely to use frequently so as to maximize their value).
I have a cousin in San Fransisco who meets all that criteria and a friend in Chicago that does as well. Both republican.
I know two families in Philadelphia and three, maybe four in Boston right off the top of my head. One of them in Boston is so Republican they are actually trying to to get involved with the Romney campaign. And I don’t even know many rich people.
So even with your unfair, guided rhetoric that’s based on your fear/distaste for urban life and certainly nothing objective, you were incorrect.
Have you even visited NYC, Chicago, Boston, or any other city outside the US which understands public transit (Vienna, Madrid, Paris, Tokyo, Toronto, Vancouver, etc.) ???
If so, did you rent a car?
Look, all in all, your missing our point. If you like driving your car, good. Waste your time and money idling away in endless traffic, be the first one to moan when prices surpass your $3 threshold. Continue polluting endlessly. Keep living that “safe” suburban “American dream” with an SUV that could haul freighter if need be…You are obviously a lost cause in our books. Too set in your ways and too misinformed to see things any other way, and you know what? That’s okay. You don’t fall into our target audience to begin with…
What we can offer you are facts to combat the bogus scenarios you have concocted. We offer solutions to the mess people like you have caused for far too long. We’re not tree hugging hippies as you’d like to suggest, we’re conscientious of our surroundings, our earth, and our impact on both.
You are more than welcome to keep arguing your point, but, I must say when you need to create hypothetical scenarios to prove a point, its going to keep falling on deaf ears…
By the way, when you find a correlation between the “busy” streets of your suburban enclave and less crime, please let me know. When you find the solution to creating an effective highway system in this city and decent model for continued growth (obviously, your type of sprawl) please forward it along…Until then we will continue to spread the good words of sustainable growth and intelligent planning…