April 2008 - American Planning Association

APRIL 2008
IN THIS ISSUE...
Strategy-of-the-Month:
Quality Design to Help
Avert Nimbyism ................................4
It’s Time for You to Serve on the
AzPA Board of Directors................4
Consultant News ..............................5
Officers & Directors..........................9
APA National News ......................11
Advertising Rates ..........................13
Arizona News ..................................14
APA Planning Awards
Call for Entries ..................................16
STEAM GENERATOR REPLACEMENT PROJECT –
ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE
By John Rorquist, Project manager
Arizona Public Service's Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS),
located 40 miles west of Phoenix, is the largest power producer in the
United States. Arizona produces more power than any other state in the
United States, supplying energy to New Mexico, Texas, Southern
California, and Arizona. To meet these demands, late in 2007 APS
completed the third and final unit of the retrofitting process that began
in 1999.
One component of the retrofitting work was the installation of two
steam generators for each unit. The steam generators were fabricated in
Italy, then transported by heavy lift ship to Guymas, Mexico. From there, Offload from heavy lift ship in
they were placed on a barge and shipped to Rocky Point and
Guymas, Mexico.
transported nearly 200 miles over land to PVNGS on public, private and
a dedicated beach road in Mexico. A total of six steam generators (two steam generators per unit)
were transported through Mexico and Arizona.
The generators were transported on Self Propelled, 26-axle
Modular Trailers (SPMTs). Each load measured 150 feet long
by 30 feet high by 25 feet wide and weighed 2.2 million
pounds (total load including transporter). The SPMTs traveled
about 2-3 miles per hour. The near 200-mile route is the
longest distance that a SPMT load of any type has been
carried, and this represents having completed this distance
safely six times. Each trip took about 25 days. Travel was
restricted to night moves when roads, such as ADOT’s SR 85
between the border and Gila Bend, could be closed for several
hours at a time.
Throughout the entire eight year project,
Michael Baker Jr., Inc. (Baker) and its
Mexican subsidiary, Michael Baker de
Generators Arrive In Mexico
Mexico, worked with APS staff, Fagioli
Group, the Italian transporter company performing the move, and with
construction contractors who constructed the bridge and highway
modifications.
Baker responsibilities consisted of bridge and highway engineering;
environmental planning, biological surveys, reports and permitting;
permit planning and strategic development; construction administration and transportation operations coordination. Baker staff participated
in presentations to government officials and coordinated all aspects of
the move with federal, state and local officials in both Arizona and
Mexico.
Generator Being Unloaded in
Preparation For the Trip to Arizona
Continued on page 2
1
VISION
APRIL 2008
Steam Generators, continued...
Project features of the engineering and environmental work
included:
• Route selection from 20 alternatives. The selected route
was primarily two-lane highway in both Arizona and
Mexico. On the primary route between Phoenix and the
Mexican resort town of Puerto Penasco, Sonora, traffic
control and road closures were key issues. Permit require
ments stipulated the convoy could only travel during
night-time hours.
• Permitting strategies and permit acquisition from more
than 20 environmental and engineering permitting
agencies in Mexico and the United States.
• Construction management and supervision of
maintenance activities for a roll-on, roll-off dock near
Puerto Penasco, Sonora, Mexico, on the mainland side of
the Gulf of California. The dock required the removal and
subsequent restoration of environmentally sensitive sand
dunes in Mexico.
• Research of structural standards dating from the 1930’s.
• Structural analysis of more than 400 bridge and drainage
structures.
• Bridge shoring and structure bypass design.
• Traffic control on two-lane highways.
• Roadway improvement design.
• Design of a 33’ clearance underpass crossing at I-8 using an
existing private railroad underpass.
• Union Pacific Railroad road crossing and right-of-entry
permits to cross high speed, high traffic mainline tracks.
• Utility coordination and relocation.
• Archaeological surveys of Indian ruins.
• Endangered species surveys of the Pygmy Owl over an
eight year period.
• Traversing through the Organ Pipe Cactus National
Monument (22-miles). Because of the Park’s environmental
sensitivity, the permit stipulated this move occur in one (1)
night. For the final move, the park allowed the loads to
park overnight at the Visitor Center because the previous
overnight parking at the Lukeville, Arizona Port of Entry
was no longer available.
Representative United State permitting agencies included:
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Federal nexus and two
Nationwide 404 Permits)
• National Park Service (Organ Pipe Cactus National
Monument – Biological surveys and Special Use Permits)
• Arizona Department of Transportation (Engineering and
environmental studies, reports and permits)
• US Fish & Wildlife Service (Biological surveys and reports)
• Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (SWPPP)
• Arizona State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
• Bureau of Land Management (Barry Goldwater Range and
multiple locations along route)
• U.S. Air Force (Luke AFB and Barry Goldwater Range)
• U.S. Boundary and Water Commission
• GSA, U.S. Customs; Border Patrol
• Arizona Game and Fish (Biological surveys and reports)
• Maricopa County and Pinal County, Arizona local
governments (Right of Entry, Floodplain and Air Quality
permits)
Representative Mexico permitting agencies included:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Administración General de Aduanas (Mexican Customs)
Comisión Nacional del Agua (Water Commission)
SCT (Highways)
Ferroviario (Railroad)
Semarnat (Environmental)
Dirección General de Impacto Ambiental (Environmental)
Semarnat Zona Federal Maritimo Terrestre (Ocean Federal
Zone)
PROFEPA (Environmental Inspection)
SCT Dirección de Autotransporte Federal (Highway
Transportation)
SCT Puertos Dirección de Concesiones (Dock Concession)
Secretaría de Energía (Energy Documentation)
Continued on page 3
2
VISION
APRIL 2008
Steam Generators, continued...
Baker traveled with the convoy throughout each of the three
moves to insure permit compliance was attained, traffic control
operated as designed and that daily coordination with each
jurisdiction was maintained.
Staff worked with the contractor
and the heavy haul transportation company to optimize the
movement of the steel plates
used to protect shallow culvert
crossings. When applicable,
Baker inspected any
minor, emergency
road repairs that
were made. Once
each move was
completed, Baker
worked with the
contractor to restore
the land to its preThe Trek to Arizona
move condition.
To successfully complete this project required the cooperation
and coordination of many people and agencies on both sides
of the border. It required developing new technical ideas,
compromise and understanding of the environmental and
engineering principles, the willingness to work together, and
multi-cultural understanding. The first unit transported was new
to everyone and required nearly three years of planning and
coordination before the first SPMT wheels hit the beach in
Mexico. Several agencies were surprised they were contacted
so far in advance, but soon understood why, and the need for
close communication. At first, some were skeptical and didn’t
know it could be done.
everyone, from those involved on the day-to-day project
activities, to staff within each of the permitting agencies now
had a sense of ownership. The relationships reached the point
that when Baker staff called, or visited, for information or
updates, the first question was “when is the next set coming?”
That was a result of extensive planning upfront, continual communications and
performing as promised.
Baker (Amex:BKR) was
founded in 1940 and is
now a full-service
engineering, planning, and
design firm. With more
than 4,000 employees in
over 40 offices across the
United States and
Night Time Moves in Arizona and Mexico
Internationally, Baker is
consistently ranked among the top 10% of the 500 largest firms
by Engineering News-Record. Baker is currently working on or
has recently completed the following projects in the Greater
Phoenix Metropolitan area: George W. Carver Museum and
Cultural Center Renovation, City of Phoenix; Design of SR 303L
from Lake Pleasant Parkway to I-17, ADOT; Peoria Municipal
Operations Building, City of Peoria; 944th Civil Engineering
Squadron Building, Luke Air Force Base, Arizona.
Once the first move was successfully completed, more people
understood the magnitude of the assignment, and the
planning effort needed. The second and third moves required
the same level of planning and execution as the first, but
3
VISION
STRATEGY-OF-THE-MONTH:
QUALITY DESIGN TO HELP
AVERT NIMBYISM
REGULATORY BARRIERS CLEARINGHOUSE
STRATEGY-OF-THE-MONTH CLUB
Affordable housing developments often experience
community opposition due to a
perception that such projects will
be based on poor designs that
do not blend in with the
surrounding neighborhood. For
this reason, HUD’s Office of Policy
Development and Research, in
partnership with New Jersey Institute of Technology’s Center for
Architecture and Building Science Research, the American
Institute of Architects, and Enterprise Community Partners, Inc.,
has created the Affordable Housing Design Advisor.
The Affordable Housing Design Advisor assists housing
developers by bringing together real world examples of highquality affordable housing projects from the people who have
successfully developed, designed, and built them. The website
houses over 80 case studies, each covering an affordable
housing development from concept to execution. Additionally,
the website provides a step-by-step guide to achieving quality
design and includes a variety of tools and resources assembled
to help affordable housing developers understand the design
process and improve the quality of their own projects.
With community support and a high-quality design, affordable
housing developers can enhance all stages of development,
alleviate “Not in My BackYard” (NIMBY) concerns, accelerate the
approval process, and ensure overall resident satisfaction.
Additional information about the Affordable Housing Design
Advisor can be found at:
http://www.huduser.org/rbc/search/rbcdetails.asp?DocId=1560.
We hope this information proves useful to you in your efforts to
grow your region’s affordable housing stock. If you have
regulatory reform strategies or resources that you'd like to
share, send us an email at [email protected], call us at 1800-245-2691 (option 4), or visit our website at
www.regbarriers.org.
APRIL 2008
It is Time for You to Serve on
the AzPA Board of Directors!
As public and private sector planners, both in urban, suburban
and rural areas, we all have a unique and personal perspective
on this great profession and how we can best represent our
chapter, its constituents, our communities and our state. Now is
the time to use your experience and make a difference by
running for office!
There are several positions open for the 2008 election cycle
including:
• Southern Section Director
• Vice President for Professional Development
• Treasurer
• Director at Large (2 positions)
• Vice President for 2010 Conference
Each of these positions has an equal vote on the board and
provides an opportunity to work on a variety of programs and
functions. The board is looking for people who are willing to
express their ideas and work with other great people on a
number of topics that affect all of us including opportunities for
professional development, legislative and student affairs, our
budget, membership, nominations for future board positions,
the newsletter and more!
The board seeks a diverse representation of experience levels
and professional perspectives, and all candidates must be a
member of the Arizona Chapter, American Planning
Association. AICP membership is additionally required for Vice
President for Professional Development. It is also important that
that all candidates have a serious desire to voice constructive
opinions, work with their peers and serve APAAZ members and
Arizona planners in the best way possible.
If you are interested in taking the next step in your career and
serving on the board, please contact Mark Eckhoff at
[email protected] or Leslie Dornfeld at
[email protected]. You can also contact the Arizona
chapter office directly at (602) 866-7188 or by e-mail at
[email protected].
Feel free to forward this message to anyone who is working to
reduce regulatory barriers to affordable housing.
A WORD FROM OUR SPONSORS...
This newsletter would not be possible without the substantial support of the newsletter advertisers. Visit www.azplanning.org to view
the AzPA Consultants’ Page. Please return our sponsors’ generosity whenever possible by patronizing the firms of those who have
consistently demonstrated their support of the planning community by advertising in AzPA’s newsletter and on its website.
4
VISION
APRIL 2008
CONSULTANT NEWS
GLOBAL WATER CENTER RECEIVES LEED©
SILVER CERTIFICATION, FIRST DUAL
PLUMBED FACILITY OPEN IN STATE!
Deutsch Architecture Group announced the successful LEED©
Silver Certification awarded on February 22, 2008 to Global
Water Resources Pinal County
Corporate Headquarters,
located in Maricopa. The
Deutsch Architecture Group’s
commitment to designing in
concert with the arid
southwest environment is
illustrated in this LEED© Silver
building, which capitalizes on
Front Entry to the Global Water
Global Water’s position as a
Headquarters in Maricopa
supplier of the highest quality
reclaimed water from the Palo Verde Utility Company’s Water
Reclamation Campus, which shares the site.
The facility is the first in the state to be uniquely equipped with
dual pressurized water lines. This provides a savings of 80% of
potable water, in comparison to a typical building built by
today’s standards, and utilizes the reclaimed water to irrigate the
building’s exterior areas, as well as service the toilets in the
washrooms. Energy usage is lowered by as much as 30%
through creative mechanical, electrical and plumbing
engineering and use of
natural daylighting.
This is the latest LEED©
Silver Certified project
completed by Deutsch
Architecture Group. For this
Global Water Headquarters at Sunset
unique project, Deutsch
teamed with Adolfson & Peterson from Tempe, to produce a
23,000 square foot educational center with many unique
features including 8 interactive educational display cases in the
lobby and interactive customer service areas and kiosks
provided to educate the public, in most cases a customer, on
water history, the current state of affairs, and future planning.
The message communicated within the building is one of water
and its sources, concerns regarding finite realities, and solutions
that include a balanced approach to reclamation, recharge, and
surface water. This facility received the coveted Crescordia award
in the Private Sector Environmental Educational Category in
September 2007, presented by Valley Forward Association.
Global Water owns and operates 16 water and wastewater
utilities in the state of Arizona serving more than 60,000 people.
The company is committed to managing future water scarcity in
the arid southwest by investing in and improving the regulated
water and wastewater companies it owns and to conserving
Arizona’s precious water resources through water recycling.
Editor’s Note: Tom Hester is new to Arizona and brings with him an extensive
background and experience in working with communities to assist with
placemaking efforts. Tom wrote the following article regarding a project he
worked on in Des Moines, Iowa, and a second article in which he discusses critical
elements that contribute to successful placemaking.
INTEGRATING LAND USE AND
TRANSPORTATION
By Tom Hester
In an effort to provide better regional connectivity to
downtown, the City of Des Moines extended a regional arterial
boulevard through an existing community in the early 2000s.
The alignment was a logical extension of the downtown grid
located north of the Raccoon River, and preserved a visual axis
to downtown. However, the older community south of the river
has a different orientation to the grid pattern. To extend the
roadway from the north grid to the south required the condemnation of land in the south community, leaving it with new
large vacant parcels leftover from the resultant shapes.
After the road was constructed, the city solicited the services of
a redevelopment planning team to work with the community
and prepare a master plan to resolve the block pattern and
identify revitalization opportunities in the downtown area.
Study Area
The development concepts were designed with the
community and the consensus built from this process created
the basis for the framework redevelopment plan. The key
principles were to connect the parks and greenways back into
the neighborhood, create a street network to tie the
community together, create public access to the river, and
maintain and enhance the historic assets of the architecture.
Continued on page 6
5
VISION
APRIL 2008
Integrating Land Use, continued...
Based on a community input process, the overriding land use
principles were to provide a riverfront park, build a range of
housing types along the river edge, identify a site for senior
housing, enhance the economic viability of the historic main
street and create new commercial uses along the new road. The
preferred option wrapped the existing grid around from the
east and connected with a major road to the south. Because of
the scale and driving speeds of the new arterial road, the urban
design treatments were to create large sidewalks with street
trees and the buildings tiered to break down the mass. The
surface walls were to receive articulation to provide spatial
variety along the road. The local main street was to receive new
pedestrian scaled street lights, paving, seating, sidewalks, and
planters connecting the community park with the riverfront
park.
With the framework in place, underutilized parcels were located
within the area and the market potential was described by local
developers. This formed the basis for identifying possible
catalyst projects and for the phasing and implementation plan.
The resulting plan included clear policy statements that were
adopted by City Council and will be used to evaluate all new
development in this community.
This process, of building a road then resolving the land use
pattern, is typical. And while it can be successful, it can also be
improved upon if the city’s transportation and land use
planners worked together from the beginning. For instance, the
axial alignment of the road made sense. But the city only
acquired the land it needed for the road itself and left difficult
parcels for the private sector to develop. The private sector will
likely require incentives to build in some of these areas.
The planning team could have identified the blighted areas
along the alignment and identified the underutilized parcels in
advance, then assembled a logical site or series of sites the city
could entitle and sell to a developer. This way the city would
stimulate development where their policies dictate. The city
would also be able to deliver an entitled piece of land that
would be more valuable than a series of resultant parcels of
varying ownership. With this model, the developer receives
certainty with less risk to development, and the city receives
desirable development and a higher land value.
Adopted Plan
Building Heights Were Critical So as not to Wall Off the Community From the
River
Tom Hester is a senior Urban Designer with the PlaceMaking Group at PB.
PlaceMaking integrates land use and transportation to plan and design
sustainable community development projects with a sense of place. Tom was
hired to provide redevelopment and urban design advice for this project. He
worked with the city’s steering committee, and the local design firm to
establish the redevelopment planning frameworks including block pattern, land
use, densities, open space, heights and character. I also drafted the key policy
statements regarding the development that were included in the adopted plan.
Identifying the Street Character and the Adjacent Land Uses Was a Critical
Process in Determining Future Land Uses Along the River
6
VISION
APRIL 2008
CONSULTANT NEWS
DESIGN OF PLACE
By Tom Hester
Editor’s Note: In this article, Tom addresses private sector developers, but much
of the discussion can also be useful to public sector planners involved in
placemaking.
While the design of public spaces is a complex task including a
negotiation of public involvement and political direction, with a
pinch of social engineering, there are a few qualities that the
design of places can be distilled to.
Public places support activities ranging from thriving
commerce to individual contemplation. These spaces can be
anchors for destinations, such as plazas and parks, and link destinations together, such as streets. The challenge in the design
of these places is to create the appropriate character for the
context. Two critical criteria the success of a place can be
evaluated against are its function and its authenticity.
Designing for Functional Needs
Successful places serve functions that can range in activity from
busy stadium forecourts to quiet pockets in local parks. The
functions of a place will vary based on the purpose of the place
and many criteria relating to scale of the space and the
amenities provided, in addition to the connections they
facilitate between people and use.
The scale of a public place needs to be appropriate to its
intended purpose and relate to the bulk and mass of
surrounding buildings and landscape. For example, tightness of
a place for small uses can bring people closer, which may be
intended for al fresco dining, while larger spaces can create a
lack of focus, which might be intended for park spaces.
For active places to succeed they need to connect with active
uses, while quiet spaces should be separated from activity. For
places to be active they need uses that will attract people.
Small spaces next to high volume small shops, such as bagel
and coffee shops, can be very successful. Public spaces
designed to be active, yet are too far from active uses and
people’s movements can become dead spaces.
Being Authentic
Public spaces tend to lend themselves to areas larger than their
required program and function. While functional elements such
as lights, seats and stands can be evocative, the dominant
character of a place is set by a designer’s sensitivities to context,
form, materials and spatial experience. One of the most difficult
design challenges is to translate emotional and socials ideas
into spatial form and overall character.
Authenticity of a place is a measure of how well the character
of a place reflects its context, purpose and function. The
challenge is to find a balance of the inherent quality of the
place and context with the designer’s interpretation. When
designers bring too much of their own interest to a design, or
fail to respond to the context, then the resultant designed
character can seem contrived. When the balance is met, a place
blends with its surrounding, loses its sense of time and
becomes ubiquitous with urban life.
Continued on page 8
Every city has examples of places that do not function well due
to inappropriate design relating to the function of the space or
the surrounding context. An example of this is a place with
plenty of amenities, such as seating and shelter, which are
underutilized because the neighborhood or adjacent uses are
not compatible. Conversely, there are also examples of very
active spaces with no place to rest or escape the elements.
Regarding functional elements, they should be strategically
located for convenience and safety while at the same time
defining the range of uses within the space.
7
VISION
APRIL 2008
Design of Place, continued...
Positioning of Place – Design and Land Use
In the last issue, I wrote about the Design of Place and argued
that the success of a place is tied to its functional response to
its context and its authenticity within a community. In these
next two issues, I will examine place as it relates to strategic
positioning. The creation of a memorable place is a key concept
of positioning and establishes the framework for a place’s longterm social and financial success. Although the development of
each project is unique, I will address three general points that
apply to a large spectrum of projects: 1) investing high-quality
design dollars, 2) locating appropriate uses, and 3) phasing the
project over time.
Where do you invest your high-quality design dollars?
Invest your high-quality design dollars where they can be seen:
in focal elements, the public realm, and the lower portions of
buildings where activities occur. Focal elements can be parts of
buildings or public investments that stand out either because
of their design, or their location within the street, block or
pedestrian passage. These elements become landmarks in a
community, contribute to the character of the area, and are
remembered by visitors and locals alike. For instance, the terminations of street views typically provide some of the strongest
focal elements. An example of this concept is St. Philips church
in Charleston, South Carolina, where its site deviates from the
standard grid pattern and juts out into the street. This provides
high-quality design to a highly valued community building.
Another example is a vertical protrusion or tower-like element
on a building. This element will, by its nature, be more visible
and should also be given high-quality design, whether it is
located at a view termination from a street or pedestrian
passage or along the mid-block.
High-quality design within highly viewable portions of the
public realm is also important, again, because these areas are
remembered and contribute to the character of a place.
Pleasant and vibrant streetscapes can be achieved affordably
with periodic areas for seating and gathering. These areas
should also be influenced by immediate land uses and transit
Continued on page 9
8
VISION
APRIL 2008
Design of Place, continued...
stop opportunities. Small investments within the public realm can
typically add additional value to places. For instance, planters can
offer friendly scale, color and texture – an attractor for many
people. Likewise, integrated lighting that does not look like an
afterthought can impart confidence that a place is not just well-lit,
but also safe.
Together, with attention to focal elements and the public realm,
invest in high-quality building materials and finishes for the first 8
to 15 feet of the building’s principal elevation. Richness within a
building’s base can be established through a variety of materials
and patterns, and robust finishes that will wear well through time.
Large areas of banal looking surfaces may not establish an inviting
character. High-quality finishes, such as those applied to walls and
paving, can reduce stains and maintenance costs, while establishing a higher quality character.
How do you locate appropriate land uses within a place?
The appropriate location of land uses will help to strengthen a
sense of place. Generally, uses that are comfortable and active will
attract people to a place, but these have to be supported by clear
access, ease of parking and allow for quieter uses.
Comfortable uses can include parks and small gathering or rest
areas that can act as counterpoints to adjacent active areas. Active
land uses (that generate high pedestrian volumes) located at the
ends of streets and pedestrian passages, are highly visible and can
demand higher lease and sales rates. Active uses such as retail can
perform well when a street is either double loaded with retail uses,
or where one side has a strong amenity feature, such as a
waterfront, park edge, public gathering or waiting space - a transit
stop, for instance. All of these conditions attract people.
Quiet uses such as residential, can be tricky in that entrances
should be well-lit and located in active areas to provide informal
surveillance, while the residential space should provide a degree of
privacy and noise control. This can be created by designing the
more service-oriented uses of the residence, such as the kitchen
and bathrooms along the noisier side of the street, while buffering
bedrooms and study areas with closets, laundry areas and other
uses that can provide noise reduction. Separation of spaces should
also be considered as a way to reduce the glare from outside lights
shining into bedrooms and quiet spaces.
Continued on page 10
OFFICERS & DIRECTORS
President
Jill Kusy, AICP, DMB Associates, Inc. ......................(480) 367-7322
President Elect
Alan Stephenson, City of Phoenix ........................(602) 262-4870
Vice President for Professional Development
Farhad Tavassoli, AICP, City of Goodyear............(623) 932-3005
Vice President for Legislative Affairs
Rob Lane, Gammage & Burnham ..........................(602) 256-4439
Vice President for Conference (2008)
Noah Cullis, City of Yuma ............................................(928) 373-5000
Vice President for Conference (2009)
Dava Z. Hoffman, Dava & Associates, Inc. ........(928) 778-7587
Secretary
Leslie Dornfield, AICP, EDAW ....................................(602) 393-3791
Treasurer
Heather Garbarino, Ariz. Commerce Dept. ......(602) 771-1128
North Central Section Director
Eric Jay Toll, David Evans and Associates ..........(602) 474-9206
South Section Director
Wocky Redsar, WVR Consulting, LLC ....................(520) 405-3846
Citizen Planner
Gordon Nedom, City of Casa Grande..................(520) 836-9142
Directors at Large
Mark Eckhoff, AICP, Town of Florence..................(520) 868-7540
Dennis M. Newcombe, Beus Gilbert, PLL..........(480) 429-3065
Sharon Adams, Show Low Main Street ..............(928) 537-8181
Russell Lambert, AICP,
Yuma County Dept. of Dev. Services ..................(928) 817-5163
University Liaisons
Barbara Becker, Ph.D., FAICP, U of A ......................(520) 621-3661
Kenneth R. Brooks, ASU ................................................(480) 965-7167
Carolyn Daugherty, Ph.D., NAU................................(928) 523-0984
Newsletter Editors
Dean P. Brennan, AICP, City of Phoenix ..............(602) 262-4499
Karen Flores, AICP,
City of Glendale Planning Dept. ............................(623) 930-2593
Student Representatives
Lucia Miranda, ASU • Kate Morley, U of A
Executive Director
Patti King................................................................................(602) 866-7188
9
VISION
APRIL 2008
Design of Place, continued...
Positioning of Place – Developing Over Time
There are many things to consider when developing a place
over time. You become not just a developer, but an investor in
the project and in the broader community. The most important
issue of establishing a place is that the first phase of
development must be successful and set the momentum for
future phases. Second, secure your entitlements and approvals
early in the process to build value into your development
before you construct anything. And third, direct the quality of
all phases of the overall built character of the place.
If the first phase of a project is unsuccessful, subsequent phases
become more challenging. An important rule to remember is to
provide for market flexibility within each phase. If your market
analysis supports it, consider providing a variety of product
types that you intend your development to carry. There needs
to be a balance between responding directly to an immediate
market, thereby providing too much of a single product, and
creating a rich and diverse place that will be active and
memorable through time. While providing a range of product
types, know which of your products could quickly convert from
one use to another.
This strategy will allow you to respond to an immediate market,
while allowing specific spaces to eventually evolve into their
intended use and strengthen the overall sense of place. For
instance, retail shops that are intended along a main street may
need to start out as residential spaces to establish a critical
mass of people and eventually evolve into live/work spaces and
shop fronts.
Invest early in securing entitlements and approvals
This process can take a substantial amount of time with
uncertain outcomes. Once your land is entitled, you have
created long-term value that can be held on to or sold. One
way to achieve successful entitlements is to get your public
officials onboard early and establish a process and product that
clearly shows a meaningful contribution to an immediate
community. It is unlikely that anyone will know your project
better than you, so give your public officials a clear vision and
timeline of the place you are intending to create.
design standards and guidelines that address contributions to
the public realm and the quality of private development.
Typically, public realm design standards and guidelines are
written as part of a property’s zoning, while private realm
design standards and guidelines are tied to specific sites that
are leased or sold and managed through a private design
review committee.
The content of both public and private standards and
guidelines needs to address overall quality while not adversely
affecting a viable financial environment for development.
Standards and guidelines should be based on clear goals for
the development while ensuring the standards will not deter
development by placing too much of a financial burden onto a
developer.
Public realm design standards and guidelines should focus only
on aspects of the design that are critical to the success of a
place. Beyond health, safety and welfare, standards should
address minimum quality requirements for public realm
development, building bulk planes and building envelopes, and
other quality standards that may be needed to achieve a
desirable quality of a place that will be memorable and perform
through time.
Private development standards come in all shapes and sizes
and can range from less restrictive to more restrictive. More
restrictive standards typically will address square footage
minimums, prescriptive color palettes and building materials,
and private open space treatments. Standards that address
these issues tend to direct the occupancy of places with a more
focused lifestyle range, which may be valuable in some markets.
Development is a complex and dynamic process. Each project
is different and will need to address a variety of issues in a
range of priorities. I have touched on several key considerations
when developing a project over phases. The overall financial
and social success of your vision for a project can be reinforced
by engaging the support of key public officials, building a
successful first phase, and directing the quality of future
development phases.
Listen to the public and be flexible. Sometimes, early
investment in the public realm can make your development
more financially viable by building a high-quality environment
first, making it easier to lease and sell sites and buildings later.
At the same time, this upfront investment could provide a basis
for leverage and negotiation with local officials with regard to
financial incentives, linkages and approvals.
Establish long-term quality standards to sustain long-term value
If you are intending to be a master developer, you will want to
direct the quality of development of the overall project. This is
critical in sustaining long-term value. If you invest and create a
successful first phase, but subsequent phases built by other
developers do not match the established quality, then value is
lost. One way to ensure the overall quality is through the use of
10
VISION
APRIL 2008
APA NATIONAL NEWS
RESPONSE TO PLANETIZEN OPINION PIECE
ON CM
By Monica Groh, Manager of Professional Development and AICP
for the American Planning Association
The initiation of Certification Maintenance on January 1, 2008
was a milestone for the planning profession. Today, barely two
months into the program, almost 200 providers are offering
3,500 activities for CM credit. This program is a significant
change from the previous volunteer continuing education
program. As always with change, it is a learning experience for
everyone involved.
I’d like to take this opportunity to clarify some questions about
the program.
Prior to adoption by the AICP Commission in April 2007,
numerous discussions were held and research conducted to
best formulate a program that would meet our members’ needs
and those of providers. These surveys, discussions and two
rounds of member and provider feedback lasted from late 2005
through April 2007.
As part of the extensive staff research work in support of the
AICP Commission’s deliberations during that time, we
contacted several organizations with professional certification
programs, including those representing architects, attorneys,
landscape architects and CPA's. This helped us gain an understanding of how different programs were organized and
operated. It also provided insight into the growth and
development periods different programs have gone through.
We continue to actively engage organizations in conversations
about their continuing education programs.
For example, the American Institute of Architects (AIA) is now
in its 14th year of its program. We have been told their program
evolved over approximately the first five years, before reaching
a somewhat stable program, as now administered. While we do
not expect a five year evolutionary period for CM, it is
reasonable to expect the program will continue to evolve for at
least three years, or to a point that we are halfway through our
second two-year reporting cycle.
As we expect the program to evolve, this will likely include the
evolution of the fee structure as well. While the current fee
structure works for many providers and the fees are considerably less than those of some other programs, we realize the fee
structure does not meet all needs. This is the reality of trying to
accommodate providers who are as diverse as our members.
We have found the fee structure to be a challenge for many
providers who offer training for little or no registration fee, such
as small non profits, in-house training, and some federal
agencies. Multi-day workshops designed for very few attendees
also do not match up well. There are other events that historically bring in few planners, such as scholarly societies (ACSP
and the associations of geographers, sociologists, etc), that
would have little incentive to offer CM credits with the current
fee structure. We would like our members attending these
events to be able to claim credits for appropriate sessions.
Nonetheless, providers can register and test the success of the
program without committing resources at a level with which
they feel uncomfortable. The Commission is committed to
keeping the entry barrier very low; thus, the $95 initial registration fee is far lower than those of many organizations.
Exploring Alternatives
For the above reasons, we are actively exploring alternative fee
models to offer providers a chance to choose the fee system
that works best for them. This may include flat annual and daily
fees, capped per credit fees, and a variety of premium fee
packages offering advertising and marketing incentives. This is a
work in progress, but through continued dialogue we are
confident we can find a way that providers of all types can
participate in this program.
It should be stressed that the CM program is adding value to
providers both by providing a standard for quality and by listing
providers so our 17,000 members can locate the many choices
on our website. As noted, those number more than 3,500, and
they are growing weekly.
Continued on page 12
In the area of fees, for example, following is a comparison with
the AIA‘s requirements. The AICP “entry fee” for providers is $95,
which includes two credit hours. The AIA entry fee is $650 for
non-profit providers and $3,300 if the provider is a for-profit
entity. In this comparison, AICP is less expensive than AIA for up
to 66 hours of courses for for-profit providers and up to 13
hours for non-profit providers. It should also be stressed that
AIA is a Trade Association, not a research and educationally
chartered organization as is APA. Our structure and
development of CM is in accordance with our non-profit
educational status.
11
VISION
APRIL 2008
Response to Planetizan, continued...
Universities as Partners
As part of our mission, we have also continued to work with the
Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning (ACSP) and have
implemented many ideas and suggestions from those
meetings. Conversations are continuing and more changes will
be forthcoming. A year ago, Sue Schwartz, Immediate PastPresident of AICP, and Paul Farmer, Executive Director and CEO,
met with the deans and department chairs of nearly 75
planning schools at the ACSP Administrators' Conference. Sue
and Paul addressed the entire gathering and also worked with
the ACSP Task Force on CM. Changes were made in the draft
CM program requirements as a result of those discussions.
At the ACSP meeting in Milwaukee this past fall, Paul Farmer
met with the ACSP Board and others in attendance at the board
meeting (about 50 people) to discuss the program, ongoing
educator concerns and possible changes. Paul also met with
the ACSP Task Force, as well as about 15 people in attendance.
Many educators were surprised to learn about the differences
among the schools in terms of state laws and university administrative regulations. It was agreed that APA would work with a
small number of schools identified by ACSP to serve as models
and represent the range of differences identified in our
discussions in Milwaukee. Those conversations are continuing
and we expect that alternate fee proposals will address many of
these diverse needs.
Engaging Providers is a Top Priority
Since the AICP Commission approved the Certification
Maintenance program last April, a team of marketing, outreach,
and AICP staff has contacted and met with more than 700
training providers from around the country to encourage them
to register as CM providers. These include providers who participated in our voluntary Continuing Professional Development
(CPD) program, as well as providers suggested to us by our
members. Often these efforts have been fruitful, once staff has
the opportunity to walk through the program details and
explain the registration process. This often reduces misconceptions about the program and allows staff to help the provider
brainstorm how CM can work within their training model. We
have found our conversations with staff of potential providers
often dispel fears and clarify our program. Providers sometimes
think CM has been around for years and we have just started
charging providers. Others may think all their courses would be
eligible and quickly calculate a number that is unfortunately
much higher than a more accurate figure. When we explain the
details, we’ve had providers conclude that one or two
additional AICP registrants would cover the fee. They have often
concluded that marginal revenues from additional attendees
exceed the marginal costs.
A Few Examples
For a modest conference of 86 attendees, 24 CM credits offered
and a $175 registration fee, only seven more registrants would
be needed to cover the $1,195 CM fee. For a conference of 291
attendees, 42 CM credits offered and a $260 registration fee,
only eight additional registrants would be needed to cover the
$2,095 CM fee.
A two-day, 12-hour workshop charging $425 per registrant will
need two additional registrants to cover the CM costs. Even
with a cap on attendance, it’s not an unlikely possibility. Our
own 14-hour PTS workshops saw a 76 percent increase in
attendance last fall, from 78 to 137 total participants for the four
courses. For Planetizen, or any similar training provider, to
register one of its four-hour online courses ($99 per course) for
CM credit, it would need to bring in just two additional
registrants per quarter. Its CM fee would be only two percent of
revenue for 100 attendees. With more than 17,000 AICP
members looking for training, it’s hard to understand how such
providers will be priced out of the market.
Bottom line: many providers see this as an opportunity rather
than a burden. Consider, for example, Lorman Education
Services (a nationwide provider) which has registered more
than 90 seminars and workshops for CM credit, many of which
fulfill the mandatory law requirement. The National Charrette
Institute has registered more than 20 activities, including a 10hour advanced Planner Certificate, available in communities
across the United States. RedVector.com, a leading provider of
computer based training, has registered numerous online
courses that will be available for AICP members for the entire
2008 period. ESRI has communicated its enthusiasm for CM and
has begun registering courses, with many more to come.
Every provider, including APA, has to register and meet the
review standards set by the Commission. This is a valued service
Continued on page 13
12
VISION
APRIL 2008
Response to Planetizan, continued...
to our members and we will continue to strengthen our
offerings. But APA alone cannot fulfill the needs of all 17,000
AICP members – this is neither realistic nor advantageous for
the planning profession. We encourage collaboration, partnerships, and creative solutions to fill this educational need. This is
the recipe for success of this program and will only make our
profession stronger. Planners value a credential that is on par
with those of similar professions.
Can we promise increased attendance? No, we can’t. No organization administering a certification maintenance program can.
What we can promise is that 17,000 + professional planners are
actively looking for relevant, high quality training; many of
which did not do so in the past. Consider that less than 2,000
AICP members participated in the voluntary CPD program –
that’s a 750 percent increase in demand. And the number is
growing – more than 1,000 planners registered for the May
2008 exam. This is the highest registration AICP has ever
experienced. Young planners are hungry for the knowledge and
training to help them tackle new challenges, and this program
was created to facilitate this.
ADVERTISING RATES
$1,600
$ 800
$ 400
$ 200
Establishing Standards and Criteria
The recent opinion piece in Planetizen states the CM program is
being operated under unfair approval procedures. This is simply
untrue. All providers, including APA and its chapters and
divisions, must follow the same registration and fee procedures,
and CM credit is not awarded automatically for any event.
Decisions are based on a clear set of standards and criteria set
forth by the AICP Commission – criteria by which every activity
is judged.
We encourage providers to take a hard look at this set of criteria
and decide what training events are and are not appropriate for
this program, and how the educational objectives meet the
needs of planners with at least two years experience. It is the
AICP members themselves, not APA/AICP, who will be the
ultimate judges of whether or not a provider offers value to the
profession. Through our online rating system, members will
have the opportunity to share comments, ideas and critiques
about training events. We hope providers will benefit from this
as well.
Challenges Ahead
The ideas outlined above are just a starting point. We as an
organization must work even harder to engage those providers
who are currently not signed up to ensure members will be
able to find opportunities to best serve their own professional
development needs. These will be met by the growing list of
providers and increasing diversity of offerings – diverse in
topics, geography and delivery mechanisms. We are committed
to making this program work well for members and the
communities they serve.
13
VISION
APRIL 2008
ARIZONA NEWS
TUCSON REGION SEEKING PLATINUM
RATING FOR BICYCLE FRIENDLY
COMMUNITY
By Richard E. Corbett, M.S., AICP
On behalf of the Tucson metropolitan region, the Pima
Association of Governments (PAG) submitted an application for
platinum status to the League of American Bicyclists’ Bicycle
Friendly Communities Program on March 21st. The regional
application effort involved all of the jurisdictions within the
Tucson metropolitan area and extensive involvement from the
bicycling community, including the Tucson-Pima County
Bicycle Advisory Committee.
What is a “Bicycle Friendly Community” rating?
In 1991, the League of American Bicyclists started the Bicycle
Friendly Community Program, to encourage local communities
to become more bicycle friendly. Over the last two years, the
Bicycle Friendly Community Program has gained increased
impetus. Bicycle activists and advocates are especially enthusiastic about this growth in the Program and applaud the
increasing benefits to cyclists. Program details can be found on
the League’s website at
http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/communities
NEW CONFERENCE CENTER FOR PRESCOTT
By Mike Bacon
The City of Prescott City Council
approved up to $5 million as a
contribution for development
and construction of a 200
room, four-star quality hotel,
including spa services, 180
villas, and a 20,000 square foot Lobby of Ponderosa Hotel and Conference
conference center which can
Center (photo courtesy of Otwell &
accommodate ballroom
Associates Architects, Prescott, AZ)
seating for 1,000. As can be
seen, preliminary renderings reveal a western architectural
heritage with Wright-inspired lighting fixtures.
The Program identifies the Five “Es” as key areas of focus:
1. Engineering – development of facilities and infrastructure;
2. Education - for both cyclists and motorists;
3. Enforcement - for both cyclists and motorists;
4. Encouragement - events and other ways to celebrate and
promote cycling; and
5. Evaluation and Planning - community and regional bike
plans, and programming.
In 1991, when the
program was developed,
the City of Tucson was
among the first to apply
and be recognized as a
Bicycle Friendly
Community. Tucson has
since been recognized in
every two-year Bicycle
Friendly Community cycle;
moreover, when the
League established the distinct award levels of Bronze, Silver,
Gold, and Platinum in 2002, Tucson was awarded the Silver
level.
Continued on page 15
Ballroom of Ponderosa Hotel and Conference Center
(photo courtesy of Otwell & Associates Architects, Prescott, AZ)
The Ponderosa Hotel and Conference Center will be located on
a small bluff to the north of Gateway Mall on the north side of
Highway 69. This point on the highway is the visual gateway to
the city where Thumb Butte and the Bradshaw Mountains burst
into a scenic panorama. Hotel visitors will be able to capture
this vista of the sunsets and western skies dining in the hotel
restaurant or sitting on the outside patio, as well as from a
number of hotel rooms and villas.
In accordance with a Development Agreement, the city will be
assured of a number of benefits such as 1) use of the
conference center at no charge (the city will pay for food,
beverage, and ancillary services and equipment at cost), 2) preferential booking of events and hotel rooms, and 3) up to the
equivalent of five nights stay per year, for official business at no
charge.
The Development Agreement also stipulates that should the
project close before the city collects sales tax and transient
occupancy tax in an amount equal to its investment, the
developer shall reimburse the city for the difference. The terms
of the Development Agreement further indicate that building
and site plans are to be submitted to the city within 12 months
Continued on page 15
14
VISION
APRIL 2008
Bicycle Friendly Community, continued...
New Conference Center, continued...
Why is a “Bicycle Friendly Community” rating important?
Over the last ten years, bicycling has experienced a major
resurgence and continues to grow as a major recreational and
transportation option for millions of Americans and hundreds
of thousands of Arizonans. Along with enhancing the quality of
life in a community, the benefits associated with the Bicycle
Friendly Community designation can translate to significant
economic benefits for the community. In the Tucson metropolitan area, for example, bicycling ranks third in terms of touristoriented economic impact. According to an economic impact
study conducted by the University of Arizona, the El Tour de
Tucson, a weekend event, yields a financial impact of $10 to
$11.2 million, and a year-round impact of $12.4 to $25.2 million.
And, of course, other cycling events and cycling tourism add
even more!
and that building permits and all other approvals be obtained
within 24 months of approval of the Development Agreement.
The Tucson-Eastern Pima Region’s Efforts
2006: First Gold in the Nation for the Tucson-Eastern Pima
Region
The Tucson-Eastern Pima Region started pursuing a Platinum
Bicycle Friendly Community rating in August of 2004. Former
Bicycle Advisory Committee member Bill Katzel kicked off the
initiative when he appeared before the Tucson Mayor and
Council on May 24, 2004, and challenged them to go after the
Platinum rating. The Mayor and Council enthusiastically
embraced the challenge, and designated a member of the
Mayor’s staff to be a liaison.
Exterior of Ponderosa Hotel and Conference Center
(photo courtesy of Otwell & Associates Architects, Prescott, AZ)
Prescott--like other municipalities—is supporting and contributing to the development of the Ponderosa Hotel and
Conference Center with the expectation of increased tax
revenues, creation of new jobs, stimulus for development of
property in the vicinity of the project, and enhanced retail and
tourism expenditures within the city.
AzPA members may wish to take special note: This project has
the potential to be a future State Conference venue.
Mike Bacon is a Community Planner for the City of Prescott,
Community Development Department.
The Platinum Challenge Steering Committee was formed in
August of 2004 and worked to develop updated, expanded
sections of the application, and PAG assumed responsibility for
submittal of the application. An area initially encompassing
eastern Pima County later reduced to include about two-thirds
of eastern Pima County, an area of 1,924 square miles, in
recognition of the rural and semi-rural areas within this portion
of the county.
The Perimeter Bicycling Association of America (PBAA) hosted
the Steering Committee meetings, during which chairs for the
“Five Es” developed final drafts of the application and PAG
coordinated the overall application process, which included
holding numerous meetings with bicycle planners in the
various jurisdictions. The application was completed and
submitted in March 2006. Just one month later, in April 2006,
the League awarded the Tucson-Eastern Pima Region Gold
status – the very first regional award in the nation!
2008: Going for the Platinum
While the region was proud to have earned the first ever
regional Bicycle Friendly Community award in the nation in
2006, enthusiasts sought to raise the rating even further. With
official endorsement from PAG, the Platinum Challenge Steering
Committee was newly reformulated as the PAG Platinum
Challenge Task Force.
Continued on page 16
15
VISION
APRIL 2008
Bicycle Friendly Community, continued...
Committee Chairs included the following:
• Donna Lewandowski, Pima County DOT, Education
• Tom Thivener, Tucson DOT, Encouragement
• Gabe Thum, PAG, Evaluation/Planning
• Kathryn Skinner, Pima County DOT, Engineering
• Paul Tosca, Tucson Police Dept, Enforcement
The Task Force focused anew on the “Five Es” (Enforcement,
Encouragement, Engineering, Education, and Evaluation and
Planning), and in May 2007 drafted a rigorous schedule calling
for completion of the application by January 2008. Following
the last meeting of the Task Force in December 2007, PAG staff
member Gabe Thum assembled the application, including
graphic materials. On March 21, 2008, PAG submitted the
Tucson-Eastern Pima Region Bicycle Friendly Communities
application to the League. The Tucson-Eastern Pima Region is
now holding its collective breath in anticipation of possibly
receiving the first regional platinum award in the nation!
Richard E. Corbett, M.S., AICP, is Chair of the Pima Association of
Governments (PAG) Platinum Task Force; President of REC
Associates, LLC; President, So AZ Chapter Institute of
Transportation Engineers; and Certified Master Cycling
Instructor, Coach, & Senior Regional Trainer. He can be reached
at [email protected]
16