Who lives in this house???

Listening to Andres Duany discuss the evolution of town centers and housing options over the last 50 years, one is amazed at how we have established our lifestyles around our housing choices. Often we look at neighborhoods of yesteryear and admire the large porches or the beautiful streetscapes. It seemed that each house was a unique structure and was often referred to by the name of the family that first lived there. The "McKinley house" or "Smith house." When you referred to the "Smith house," everyone knew exactly what house you were referring to. Over the years, we moved to the suburbs and houses started to look more and more alike. You can drive into some subdivisions and row after row of houses will look alike. Also, the garage started to appear on the front of the house. It certainly cost less if you did not have to build a driveway from the street to the back of the house. Alleys disappeared and fenced in back yards became popular. People would come home from work, enter the house and not leave again until the next day when they back out the car and headed off to work. You didn't really know your neighbors and they didn't know you. The only thing you knew for certain was that a car lived at that house because the garage was the largest feature of the front of the house.

Today, we are seeing an increasing demand for some of the "neighborhood" communities of yesteryear when people actually were neighbors. People want a home that has an inviting feel from the street. The garage is back where it belongs, in the back of the home. The house is designed to allow people to interact with the neighborhood when they want and to have privacy when they desire it. Homes in Brytan are designed to allow choices in how you live rather than in dictating how you must live. For instance, in traditional subdivision homes with the garage doors across most of the front, there is not a place to sit on the front porch, nor is there a beautiful street to look out upon. Start to look around at the different communities and see if you notice some of these design features.

Participating in a Charrette

Thinking back on the charette...

If you are involved in any way with land planning, design, architecture, engineering or development, you need to participate in a charette. It is an amazing process to watch a site plan become a workable entity. Working with Duany, it was important for us to follow the transect that he actually was in the process of developing during our charette. We wanted to develop a town that went from most urban to more rural and include the many visual "hints" that assist the user that he is going from an urban environment to a more rural environment. The most interesting aspect of the process was the interaction between what the best design was versus the best design that was possible given the many limitations that are put on the site. The challenge of designing communities today is to do so within the many requirements that are often at odds with the goals of new urbanism. For example, new urbanism promotes pedestrian friendly streets. This goal encourages narrow streets, on-street parking and curves to force drivers to slow down. The reality is that people don't want to slow down. The reality is that emergency services don't want to drive on narrow lanes. It was increasingly difficult to meet all the requirements and not lose the essence of new urbanism during the process. Also, one has to factor in the amount of open space or green space required, the separation requirements between the various utilities in the project and the placement of civic spaces. Personally I probably am in the minority but I am not a fan of requiring trees to be planted in islands throughout parking lots. Planners, seeking shade, require a tree every "X" number of parking spaces. Quite frankly, I think requring a certain number of trees is great but if you could get a larger section in the parking lot with several trees or encourage more of a useable urban park near the parking lot, it would be better for the trees and for the users of the space. Maybe it is a good idea to let the cars get hot in the sun...maybe people would be more willing to take mass transit...who knows?? I just think that urban parking lots need to be urban and smaller in the final footprint rather than larger than they need to be because of the island requirements. Sub-urban parking lots could have different requirements and, in my opinion, should have different requirements. In fact, there should be rules that are followed for urban spaces and rules for more rural spaces. When governments only specify one way and do not consider the profile of the area, it greatly hinders the ability to create a sustainable and enjoyable space.

The Give and Take of a Charrette

After sending out numerous invitations and publicizing the meeting times, the charrette began. We were extremely pleased with the turn-out. New urbanism was a new concept to many people in this area. Haile Village Center is a nice example of traditional neighborhood design for a village, but Brytan is larger and it to be designed as a town. The difference involves providing more of the daily needs within the town boundaries. The charrette opened with a presentation by Duany where he explained many of the concepts of new urbanism. He explained the importance of pulling the buildings up to the streets, of creating vistas at the end of the streets, of on-street parking to provide a barrier between the pedestrians on the sidewalk and the vehicles on the street. Traffic calming is an important element in creating a truly walkable community. It is interesting to note that people are in favor of slowing down the traffic in a general sense but they don’t like to be slowed down in their daily commute.

The individual meetings took place with discussions of building placement and the role of neighborhood parks. Other topics included architecture and the importance of having homes that have “eyes on the street”; so many homes are designed today where once a person enters the home, he has no connection to the neighborhood until he leaves the next day. Wide front porches and windows help create a connection that serves an important role in establishing community. However, once the connection is made to the neighborhood, you have to still find a way to protect the private realm for the homeowner. Elevating the house so that windows are not at eye-level help provide privacy from the street. Also, the role of interior courtyards helps promote an outdoor private realm that homeowners can enjoy without the hassles or expense of large yards. With the increasing importance of water conservation, smaller yards are an important asset to the home. People need to be able to enjoy the outdoors so the location of recreational elements was an important feature of the overall design of the community.

Opinions were shared and designs were modified. Each day, the design would be “posted” on boards that people could stop by, review and comment. We were surprised at the number of people that truly followed this process and took the time to try and understand why a building was faced in a particular way. The design of Brytan was to be open and inviting to its neighbors, not a fenced or walled off subdivision that is frequently built. It was interesting to see how some of the neighbors wanted to be able to visit Brytan and interact with the community but others wanted to have Brytan separated and completely unconnected from their land. Through the give-and-take of the charrette process, a compromise of sorts was reached. Brytan has been designed so that future connections could be established if those neighboring groups so decided.

After a week of intensive meetings and design work, two plans emerged from the charrette. Duany wanted to tweak both plans for a bit and then allow a determination as to which one best met the overall objectives.

Remember, at this time, the regulations of our County did not allow mixing uses vertically nor were TNDs encouraged.

Confessions of a TND Founder

First of all, let me introduce myself, my name is Alison Cox and I along with David Miller and Sara Summerfield represent the Founder of Brytan. The Founder is Brice Development and the three people primarily responsible for the development will be providing some insight into why we developed this project the way that we did and share some of the experiences that we have had along the way.

Let's start with a bit of history. The site, located along Archer Road, has long been the target of large box retailers and other commercial enterprises. As a company, we had developed many traditional neighborhoods with homes on large lots but this location seemed to need something different. The site is in an area defined as an Activity Center and we had always been told that when it was developed, the road would need to "re-connect" with 75th Street on the south side of Archer Road. Many presentations and ideas were presented but none seemed to be right.

One day in 1998, a planner asked David and I to attend a presentation and conference featuring Andres Duany of DPZ & Company, a renowned town planner. We went to Reston, Virginia and toured Kentlands (a large TND/new urbanist project). At the conference we heard from other founders, lenders, engineers and architects. We came back thinking that the idea of a new urbanist project may be just the answer for the development of this property. Duany was familiar with Haile Village Center and we invited him to visit the site the next time he was in the area.

Duany visited Gainesville and walked the site. Like any site, it had challenges but overall he thought the location in an Activity Center along a major arterial road was a real plus. Duany laid out several of the positives and negatives and indicated he would be willing to send us a proposal.

My thoughts at this point were mixed. It seemed like we had the right development for the location but the current rules and regulations did not allow for the mixing of uses, especially vertically; residential above commercial was a no-no. Should we invest in designing a project that may never be allowed or should we just allow the big box retailer to develop the site as the rules currently allowed? We finally decided to get several proposals from reputable and noted firms. We realized that this was a large project, the largest we had ever undertaken and that it would require extensive assistance from experts. We interviewed several different firms and it was an impressive experience to talk with these people. Each firm had certain strengths but the one common thread was their enthusiasm for this type of development.

Then we got the proposals. Wow. This was far different than anything we had ever seen. We really had to think through what we would be getting for the dollars spent because it was a lot of dollars for design work. Also, we still did not have the rules to allow the development so this was an investment based on hopes for change. Once we recovered from the initial shock, we tried to analyze each proposal. David and I started the adventure with Duany and I think we developed a rapport that made him the person that we wanted to work with. If you know Duany, you know that he will give you his most honest assessment and, quite frankly, we needed that feedback. We looked at the pros-- a great design in the right location and encouraging lifestyle choices that were gaining in popularity (e.g., walkability)-- and at the cons-- no regulations permitting such design and a huge front end investment. Finally, we looked at the local governing body. The commission at the time was certainly promoting TND type developments. So, we decided to make the investment.

Next: The process begins...