Climate Change and Pasadena's General Plan: What Would It Take? The Carbon Neutral City

California and Pasadena are committed to “green” environmental policies. But a lot of the beneficial changes we've enacted––the bag ban, 10% renewable energy, green building codes, etc.––are a drop in the bucket compared to the elephant in the room: our Land Use policies.

That is, does Pasadena's zoning code encourage people to live in a sustainable manner––walking, biking, using public transportation, with only occasional automobile use––or does it contribute to the sprawl of suburban development,  where low density makes frequent automobile trips an unavoidable necessity of daily life?

Pasadena is sustainable because it is a compact, walkable urban neighborhood that is connected to Greater Los Angeles via the Gold Line.

Downtown Pasadena, as a compact, walkable urban neighborhood served by the Gold Line, is uniquely able to provide the right kind of housing that isn't auto-dependent. Because our apartments, office buildings, shops, and other buildings are so closely-spaced, Downtown Pasadena is sustainable (although there is still substantial improvements that could be made).

Outside of a few pockets inside of Los Angeles, Santa Monica, West Hollywood, and Long Beach, much of the rest of Southern California is dismally auto-dependent and unsustainable.

The choice presented by the General Plan is: Do we want to maximize Downtown Pasadena's unique opportunity by allowing additional housing growth Downtown, or do we want to clamp the lid shut and say to prospective new residents, "Sorry, there's no more room for you." The larger issue in terms of climate change and sustainable planning is regional. Will Pasadena step up and provide a place to live for people who want to become a 1-car household, commute via the Gold Line, or perhaps get rid of all their autos altogether?  Will Downtown Pasadena have room for people who may be living in auto-dependent Rancho Cucamonga, Irvine, Glendora, etc. or even East Pasadena to move here and ditch their car?

 

Condominiums (i.e. the Montana Residences) with ground-floor retail & services (i.e. Euro Pane Bakery) that are within convenient walking distance to work, shops, and the Gold Line, are sustainable. More residential development in Downtown Pasadena will decrease emissions and energy use because the compact urban use of land gets people out of their cars

Pasadena's General Plan, therefore, should significantly expand or eliminate the cap on residential development in Downtown Pasadena. The General Plan should continue the policy, affirmed by voters, of Guiding Principle #1, which states that "Growth will be targeted... [and] higher density development will be directed into our Downtown..."

Not only is increased urban density in Downtown Pasadena the sustainable policy, it also results in a higher quality of life for both Downtown residents, and for residents living in the surrounding single-family homes, too.

The following article does such a good job of outlining the need for a dense, compact urban core for Pasadena, that it deserves reposting here. What Would It Take? The Carbon Neutral City — Environment — Utne Reader. An excerpt:

...the best thing a city can do [to become a Carbon Neutral City] is densify as quickly as it can. That needs to be said every time this issue comes up, because it’s the only universal strategy that works. That’s the best-documented finding in urban planning—that as density goes up, trip length goes down and transportation energy use goes down. The main question that nearly every city in North America needs to address is how to densify quickly. Once people are grappling with that, though, there are other things people need to do to make that work: making neighborhoods walkable, with green spaces, street life, mixed-use zoning and other qualities that make a place livable. If you have density without that, you just have vertical suburbs.

One of the most unfortunate side effects of the urban activism of the ’60s and ’70s is the belief that development is wrong and that fighting it makes you an environmentalist. We know that dense cities are both environmentally better and dramatically more equitable places. Walkable neighborhoods are better than the suburbs for people with a wide range of incomes, and what happens in cities that don't grow is that they gentrify and poor people are pushed out. Trying to fight change makes you less sustainable and more unfair.

There’s a great plan for the city of Melbourne... The city’s growing quickly, needs to add a million people over the next decade or two, but they don’t want that to be sprawl. So they took a digital map of the city and blocked off everything that’s currently single-family residences, everything that’s a historical building, everything that’s green space, working industrial land, and other things people are vociferous about valuing. That left a fairly small percentage of land. But they showed that if they concentrated density in those corridors, they could add a million people without expanding the city at all, and it would add all these benefits, like better public transit and such. You can dramatically increase the density of places without taking away things people want—and actually adding things they want but couldn’t afford today—because the average suburb isn’t dense enough to financially support a tram or the like. But if you add a dense core that can support that, suddenly even the people around it, in their single-family homes, get the benefit, too. I call that “tent-pole density,” where extremely high density in a small area brings up the average for a whole neighborhood, even when the rest of the neighborhood doesn’t change. I think it’s a really important concept, one that most people don’t get.

We’ve run out of time for incremental approaches. For carbon-neutral cities, there are things worth talking about in how our consumption patterns can change—sharing goods, etc.—but those are a fraction of the impacts of transportation and building energy use. If we need to choose priority actions, the most important things are to densify, provide transit, and green the buildings.

What Would It Take? The Carbon Neutral City — Environment — Utne Reader.

Other great links

The consequences of suburbanization: YouTube video "Sprawling From Grace" 

 What is Transit-Oriented-Development? (Portland, OR):  PBS e-squared (narrated by Brad Pitt)

 The negative consequences of height restrictions: The Atlantic: Should Building Taller Be Much, Much, Easier?

"This sounds counter-intuitive, but taller buildings that are part of a walkable, transit-oriented community can actually help ease congestion. In a denser urban world, people will walk to work, clearing up traffic congestion. That time commuters spent in their cars they can instead spend with their families. Now they’re happier. And with all these happy people living in such close proximity to each other, dense communities can support more retail, more restaurants, more transit, more tax base, all of which serves to attract yet more people and businesses."

General Plan Workshop - Saturday, March 10th

Come to a community workshop to discuss the objectives and policies that make up the General Plan’s Land Use and Mobility Chapters. The Land Use Chapter outlines how and where we should grow and the Mobility Chapter guides the safe and efficient movement of people and goods throughout the City. We need to attend this workshop to urge continued sustainable investment in Downtown through increased residential caps!

• Saturday, March 10th @ 9:30 AM, Pasadena City College, 1570 E. Colorado Bl., Circadian Room, Building CC

For more information, go to www.cityofpasadena.net/generalplan and click “Policy Workshops” or call the DPNA at (626) 539-3762.

New York Times calls Pasadena a “Transforming Suburb”

Demographic Trends Make Walkable Urban Neighborhoods More Desirable



Pasadena real estate will continue to hold value if the city continues support for higher-density mixed-use developments with good transit and pedestrian connections.



A recent op-ed piece in the New York Times by Christopher B. Leinberger explains why Pasadena housing values have not suffered as greatly as “fringe suburbs” (the drive-till-you-qualify tract home suburbs in the Inland Empire and outer LA county): Pasadena’s density and walkability is increasingly more desirable.

In the late 1990s, high-end outer suburbs contained most of the expensive housing in the United States, as measured by price per square foot . . . Today, the most expensive housing is in the high-density, pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods of the center city and inner suburbs.
. . . Simply put, there has been a profound structural shift — a reversal of what took place in the 1950s, when drivable suburbs boomed and flourished as center cities emptied and withered.

This increased demand for high-density, pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods is the result of a demographic shift in 2 generations, he explains:
1. The Baby Boomers–who are gradually becoming empty-nesters–are downsizing from larger homes.
2. The Millennials–who are just starting to leave the nest–have been raised on sitcoms in urban settings (Seinfeld, Friends, Sex in the City vs. the Boomers’ Leave it to Beaver, The Brady Bunch, etc.) and therefore consider city life to be an attractive norm. Also, Millennials are marrying and producing children at lower rates than previous generations, and need less space for smaller households.
Pasadena, as an inner suburb of Los Angeles with its’ own urban core, has enhanced its’ walkability and therefore desirability by permitting well-designed higher-density mixed-use development in Downtown Pasadena, replacing single-story strip malls with multi-story condos/apartments that have retail or commercial uses on the ground floor. By placing these developments next to the Gold Line, and by making the Downtown Neighborhood more pedestrian-friendly, a Downtown resident is less dependent upon a car to fulfill daily needs. That’s an increasingly attractive option that is in short supply nationwide.
Pasadena should continue and support this trend with a General Plan that expands and allows greater density within the Downtown’s Central District, while preserving its historically significant assets.


And, Pasadena should invest in more pedestrian-friendly improvements, such as a streetcar system that would extend the walking range or residents and promote a “park once” ability among visitors.
Read the New York Times article here: The Death of the Fringe Suburb, November 25, 2011 by Christopher B. Leinberger
For a much more in-depth analysis, see: The Next Real Estate Boom, The Brookings Institution, November 2010.

Why We Love Pasadena: "Big City" Arts and Culture

A few weeks ago on a Saturday night, Pasadena music lovers scowled in consternation as they studied their date books and were forced to make a choice between TWO excellent orchestras, both performing in central Pasadena at the same time: the Pasadena Symphony, and the Colburn School Orchestra.




The Pasadena Symphony performed a free special concert, “Music Under the Stars,” in front of City Hall. Featuring music from Broadway musicals, along with performances by other local musicians and choirs, and a family festival with food trucks providing the munchies, residents stretched out in their lawn chairs and enjoyed the music under the clear night sky.





The Robinson brothers also enjoyed "Music Under the Stars," performed by the Pasadena Symphony in front of City Hall. During the concert, the expression on their faces was much less stony! Er, iron-y! Hah!A few blocks away, in the gorgeous and acoustically excellent Ambassador Auditorium, the orchestra of the Colburn School of Music opened its concert season with Mussorgsky's much–loved “Pictures at an Exhibition.”





Pasadena's Ambassador Auditorium, home of HRock Church, the Pasadena Symphony, and the Colburn OrchestraAlthough not as well-known as, for example, Julliard or the Eastman School of Music, Downtown Los Angeles' Colburn School provides similar elite music instruction to competitive young musicians. This year, the Colburn School chose the Ambassador Auditorium as its preferred venue, and its orchestra will perform its entire season at the Ambassador.





A Full House: The orchestra of the Colburn School of Music performs inside the Ambassador AuditoriumObviously, word has spread of these excellent free concerts, because on Saturday night all tickets were sold out, and the “rush” line of people hoping to snag a no–show seat was at least 50 people deep.



Those lucky enough to get in were well rewarded. The student musicians dug into their parts enthusiastically. I was especially struck by how rich and solid the string section sounded, playing together with perfect intonation and rhythm, the upper strings strongly supported by the lower strings.



Joseph Brown revealed a wonderful new timbre that I had never heard before in his trumpet solos, Christopher Bartz coaxed a magnificently blended orchestral sound out of his alto saxophone, and Francesca dePasquale, the soloist for Dvorak's Violin Concerto, performed on the 1st part of the program, was virtuosic.



The point is, for a city of only 140,000 people, Pasadena enjoys an extraordinarily high number of artistic and cultural events, and it's a reason that residents frequently cite when talking about why they love their city. Indeed, one of Pasadena's Seven Guiding Principles is: “Pasadena will be promoted as a cultural, scientific, corporate, entertainment, and educational center for the region.”



If we consider orchestras alone, Pasadena is home to the following: the Pasadena Symphony, the Pasadena Pops, the Colburn School, Muse/ique, the Pasadena Community Orchestra, the Pasadena Young Musicians Orchestra, the Crown City Symphony, the Lake Avenue Chamber Orchestra, the Caltech–Occidental Symphony Orchestra, and the Southwest Chamber Music ensemble.



At an average of 50 musicians per orchestra, that's 140,000 / (50x10) = 1 musician per 280 residents!



That's a silly statistic, of course, but still impressive and kind of fun. Santa Monica and Long Beach would stack up similarly, I suspect. But Pasadena has the advantage of close proximity and reliably quick access to Downtown LA, the true cultural center of Southern California, via the Gold Line and its own effectively private freeway, the 110.



A number of factors contribute to Pasadena's cultural richness, not the least of which is the socioeconomic makeup and educational attainment of its populace. But also important are population density* and community engagement*, which we often discuss on this blog.



As the arts are of interest to a minority of people, it takes a critical mass (quantity) of local (proximity) supporters to fund and attend events. Quantity ÷ Proximity = Density.



Community engagement is that ephemeral measurement of a people's social attitudes towards one another, and the propensity of those people to act upon those feelings. Do a city's people care about what goes on in their city? Do they bother to get to know their neighbors? To be friendly? To join local causes? Show up to meetings? Drop by each others' houses? Host parties? Participate in local sports? Volunteer at a church or school? Read the local newspaper? Smile at passers-by? Vote? Get involved with a neighborhood association?



Those are activities and habits that do not occur naturally on their own, in a vacuum, but which must be cultivated and maintained, and which depend on collective participation by everybody. Pasadena has historically done well in this regard; we have been joiners and doers, and that's why the arts are alive in Pasadena.



Let's keep it that way!



* For further reading on the importance of density & efficiency in cities, I recommend Richard Florida's article in the Atlantic Monthly: "The Rise of the Social City." On community engagement, the seminal work is Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam.

Pasadena Redistricting - Four Districts for Downtown?



Downtown Pasadena is split into FOUR council districts.Pasadena is geographically divided into seven districts, with one council member for each. The 2010 census forces Pasadena to re-draw the lines for each district.

 

The DPNA is interested in how Downtown Pasadena is represented. Currently, our neighborhood is split into FOUR Districts. This raises a number of questions that will be worth considering in the months ahead:

1. Do our elected representatives and city staff recognize Downtown Pasadena as a distinct neighborhood?
2. Are there distinct sub-neighborhoods within Downtown Pasadena that would justify current or alternative boundary lines?
3. If not, is there a compelling governmental interest that justifies splitting the Downtown Pasadena neighborhood?
4. How does the distinction between residents of single-family dwellings vs. residents of multi-family dwellings (apartments/condos) factor into the boundary lines? How should it?
5. Are there relevant demographic and lifestyle characteristics of Downtown Residents that are substantially different from other Pasadena residents? Do Downtown Residents, who live in high-density apartments and condos, have different values and needs compared to low-density suburban residents?
6. If so, do the current boundaries unfairly dilute the voting power of Downtown Residents?

View Downtown Pasadena, by City Council District in a larger map

The current council appointed a special redistricting commission, who will meet twice a month, discuss, and then recommend new boundary lines for the City Council districts. We hope the commission will consider and address the above questions. Join us as we attend the commission meetings and participate in conversation.

 

Access meeting schedules and more information at: www.cityofpasadena.net/cityclerk/redistricting

Downtown Residents Support Pro-Growth General Plan - B&C

“Economic Vitality” and “Smart Growth” options provide the best quality of life in the decades ahead.


Pasadena's General Plan will guide public policy regarding Land Use and Mobility until the year 2035. The city asked residents what was important to them, and they responded. In general, Pasadena residents agree about the qualities that they love, and the problems that exist. However, there is considerable disagreement about the effects and the desirability of recent and future growth in Downtown Pasadena.

Pasadena General Plan Workshop - June 28 at the Community Education Center in East Pasadena

As citizens who live our everyday lives in Downtown Pasadena, members of the Downtown Pasadena Neighborhood Association believe that well–managed growth IS desirable, and that Pasadena's Downtown should be an exciting urban core that welcomes new residents and businesses. We believe that density––i.e. tall buildings that are closely spaced––and the mixing of commercial and residential uses are appropriate and necessary in Downtown Pasadena.



Without continual renewal, decline is inevitable

Walkability. Pasadena has made great strides in the last 20 years. The Gold Line was built, Old Pasadena was restored to its former glory, economic conditions improved, and new condo and apartment buildings (many with retail shops on the ground floor) were built, bringing an influx of new residents. Many of those new residents were attracted by Pasadena's walkability––that is, the close proximity of residences and businesses which decreases one's dependence on a car, and allows one to walk or bike to shops, grocery stores, movie theaters, and other daily destinations.



By definition, walkability requires density; if buildings are too far apart, or if the built environment is unpleasant, walking isn't an option. Parking lots, empty storefronts, and dilapidated or unkept properties are the enemies of walkability. In addition, walkability depends on the types and quality of businesses within walking distance. Residents of Downtown Pasadena do not walk to each other's homes, they walk to businesses. If those businesses provide the goods and services that residents desire, and therefore eliminate the need to drive elsewhere, then the quality of life has been maximized. But businesses set up shop based upon demand. More residents can support more and better businesses.


Therefore, the DPNA believes that growth––more residents and more businesses––is desirable. Alternatives B and C provide that growth.



Moreover, the DPNA believes that an anti-growth policy (represented by Alternatives A and D) threatens the existing businesses and quality of life in Downtown Pasadena, because there is competition from neighboring cities, and because a no–growth policy reduces incentive to improve, replace, or even maintain existing buildings.

Pasadena has historically been a center for business, shopping, arts, and other metropolitan amenities. Residents of the surrounding communities have driven to Pasadena, particularly Downtown Pasadena, to access the goods and services that are unavailable in their own communities. Recently however, Arcadia, Glendale, and even Alhambra have taken note of Pasadena's success, and have built large mixed-use developments that are undoubtedly drawing shoppers and residents away from Pasadena. Old Pasadena is buzzing, but the Playhouse District has unrealized potential, and South Lake Avenue has many vacancies. Although shopping is not the only important component of a vibrant city, it is is a driver of the other factors that make a city a desirable “destination” community. Pasadena's status and prestige is being threatened by neighboring cities, and a no–growth policy puts Pasadena at a disadvantage.



Downtown Pasadena is full of beautiful historic buildings (many of them over six stories), but it also has quite a few low–rise strip malls that are ugly and should be replaced. For example, the Kinko's building at Lake/Colorado, or the mattress stores at Mentor/Colorado. If redevelopment is limited to two stories, rather than four or six stories (which provide more income), then property owners may opt to postpone redevelopment, and they may defer maintenance. Blight is no stranger to Downtown Pasadena, and continued growth is the best way to avoid its return.

In general, although there is much unrealized potential and room for improvement, we still love Pasadena as it is, and if it were to be somehow frozen in time and protected from decline, that would not be such a bad thing. As it is, Pasadena is a success. However, it is impossible to freeze a city without killing it. Without continual renewal, decline is inevitable.

Pasadena’s continued success, therefore, depends on continuing, not stopping, the growth of the last 20 years in order to maintain its position as a regional Metropolitan City Center.




Alternative C "Smart Growth" targets high-density development near Downtown Gold Line stations (red bubbles) and creates walkable "mini-villages" with mixed-use development (purple bubbles) along Washington Blvd, and at the Fillmore, Allen, and Madre stations. A series of parks called the "Emerald Necklace" runs through East Pasadena, to be located under the utility lines.

 Other Concerns

Besides walkability and urban vitality, the DPNA believes that options B “Economic Vitality” and C “Smart Growth” best support the other concerns that Pasadena residents identified.






On a citywide basis, Alternative C "Smart Growth" Results in: 1. The most housing. 2. The greatest population increase. 3. The most Net Revenue to the City General Fund. 4. The best environment results. 5. The second best travel times.


Traffic Congestion. Traffic, the scourge of Greater Los Angeles, was often cited as a frustration during the General Plan outreach effort. Although some have blamed an increase in traffic on new residential development downtown, statistics show that Downtown residents are more likely to walk, bike, and use public transit, and therefore they generate less traffic then suburban dwellers. Ultimately, traffic congestion is a regional issue–conditions in Santa Monica and Burbank affect conditions in Pasadena–and the regional solution lies in providing alternatives to driving, and in decreasing the overall miles traveled. We all need to work, shop, and conduct our daily activities closer to home. Alternative C “Smart Growth” in particular achieves this goal, which is demonstrated in the statistics showing the number of “Residents Near a Gold Line Station” and the “Vehicle Miles Traveled.” Alternative C also has the second best result in terms of “Travel Time in PM Peak Hour,” which is suprisingly better than might be expected given the large increases in population, housing, and net revenues of Alternative C.


Affordable Housing. The most efficient way to make housing affordable for all is to increase the supply of housing. The more housing units that are available for sale, the lower the price. Increasing density and locating housing in lower-demand neighborhoods will also improve affordability.






Although Alternative C offers the best result city-wide, in the Central District, it is Alternative B "Economic Vitality" that provides: 1. More Housing 2. Less Vehicle Miles Traveled 3. Better Environmental Results

 

Historic Architecture and Preservation. Our ability to protect the city’s historic resources is not predicated on blocking future development. Preserving Pasadena's beautiful old buildings and encouraging new landmark buildings are two separate objectives that can comfortably co-exist, but a “no growth” stance severely undermines the future viability of Pasadena.


Sustainability. Density, walkability, and decreased driving leads to lower emissions of greenhouse gases. In addition, the world supply of oil and other fossils fuels is running dry. As gas prices continue to rise, and as water continues to be rationed, the suburban model that constitutes much of Southern California will no longer be practical, and consumers will desire dense, urban, human-sized communities that require less energy for transportation. Pasadena is just such a place, and downtown Pasadena under alternatives B and C is particularly well suited and optimized for human happiness that is independent of the automobile.



Inclusiveness. Some have objected that the sustainability statistics show results on a per capita basis, and have suggested the no-growth alternative as a way of shoving population growth off onto other cities, and thereby limiting increases in greenhouse gases and traffic. This “Country Club” attitude is not only selfish, but it risks the loss of State and Federal funding which is tied to such measures. It’s not a viable option.

Bottom line: Pasadena is best served with a mix of “Smart Growth” solutions (B and C) that protect our unique cultural legacy, ensure healthy economic vitality, and promote walkability and sustainability.


Based on online voting, a single plan will be developed and presented to the city council. Please complete the online survey to register your support for a pro-growth General Plan. The online survey is available at http://www.cityofpasadena.net/generalplan/ and is open until WEDNESDAY, JULY 13th.

SUNDAY, 2PM – Let’s Get Together! – Downtown Pasadena Neighborhood Meeting

Friends and neighbors are gathering this Sunday, May 1, at 2pm.

The Downtown Pasadena Neighborhood Association is off the ground, and is holding its first public meeting.  We're spreading the word, to encourage every energetic resident of Downtown Pasadena to get involved.  We love Pasadena, and want to make it even better!

Where: Bang & Olufson, 169 West Green Street, Pasadena, CA 91105 (map)

 

Who are we?

We are the folks who LIVE in downtown Pasadena.  We are renters. We are owners. We are Businessowners and stakeholders.  We are people of all sorts, with an interest in Downtown Pasadena.

What do we mean by "Downtown Pasadena"?

We're still getting acquainted, meeting new people, and defining ourselves, but so far, we think of the boundaries of Downtown Pasadena as, roughly, the 210 freeway (north), Catalina Ave (east), California Blvd (south), and Pasadena Ave (west).

Why do we need an Association?

Life in Downtown Pasadena is different than other parts of our city. Our neighborhood is more urban, more dense, and more walkable than anywhere else in Pasadena.  Therefore, our needs and desires are different.  Other Pasadena neighborhoods have formed associations to advocate for their interests, but up until this point, Downtown has not had a voice to speak up for our needs and desires. That changes now.  Plus, why be a stranger? This is a great way to meet the people that you live with.

What kinds of things will we accomplish? What are our goals?

That's still up for discussion.  We're still talking amongst ourselves, sharing our concerns, and listening to opinions. So far, a few common themes have emerged (see our working mission statement), but those will change and be refined as we hear new voices.

All residents of Downtown Pasadena are welcome and encouraged to attend and invite their neighbors. Parking is metered on the street, or there is $5 parking at the lot on Pasadena Ave, or you can WALK there, because this is Downtown Pasadena!!

Please, join us!!

A New Park in the Playhouse District: Community Workshops Announced

Click for more info on workshop scheduling

Please consider attending this fun and engaging workshop tomorrow (Thursday evening) where anyone interested in the future urban park planned for Union/El Molino in the Playhouse District will be able to brainstorm and shoot out ideas that will be collected and used to help design the new park. This is the first of four workshop meetings planned for April, May, and June.

Please see below for more info:

Union & El Molino Park NowCommunity Workshop Series

1. Thursday, April 28, 2011

• from 6-8:30 p.m., South Hall
• Brainstorming

2. Saturday, May 14, 2011

• from 10am-12:30 p.m., Room 301
• Community Develops Park Designs

3. Thursday May 19, 2011

• from 6-8 p.m., Room 301
• Design Alternatives Reviewed, Discussed and Selected

4. Thursday, June 2, 2011

• from 6-7 p.m., Room 301
• Confirmation of Selected Design

Workshop Location:
Pasadena Presbyterian Church,
585 East Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena