University of Delaware

Retrofitting Suburbia Sustainably

Analysis of Suburban Corridors

Daniel R. Hutton
UAPP[406] Planning Sustainable Communities and Regions
Dr. Phillip Barnes
Term Paper
May 12, 2016
 2

Introduction

As the perpetuation of precedential suburban residential and

business growth continues, we as a society further deepen the grave of

unsustainability in which we find ourselves. In order to right the wrongs

of the past and turn a corner towards a sustainable future we must

look towards the repurposing, retrofitting and redevelopment of land

for more sustainable purposes. More specifically, the countless

suburban, semi-urban strip mall corridors, which represent a quasi-

suburban core, should come first in this tall endeavor. How do we

confront the political power of a long-standing paradigm? In this paper

I intend to explore, research and analyze the best practices, causes

and effects of smart growth redevelopment of suburban corridors.

Retrofitting suburban corridors, can it attain sustainable outcomes?

To define outcomes as being truly sustainable or not, all found

data and resources pertaining to suburban corridors are evaluated

using the Three Es criteria of economy, environment and equity as

defined in Stephen M. Wheelers Planning for Sustainability. As perhaps

the most pre-eminent symbol to the holistic approach of sustainable

planning, the Three Es provides a simplistic yet effective guideline to

reconcile conflicting goals and construct sustainable outcomes. This

strategy of using the categorical criteria of the Three Es is

administered keeping in mind the overarching belief of sustainable

development as meeting the needs of the present without

 3

compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own

(World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). In

addition, this methodology of proving the attainment of sustainable

outcomes by retrofitting suburban corridors is visually shown through

the use of a policy matrix grid.

Standing up for the attainment of sustainable outcomes in

planning for the past 25 years, is the New Urbanist movement. This

movement made up of a coalition of urban designers, architects,

planners, developers and engineers have shifted the current planning

paradigm by debating alternative forms of development. These

alternative forms of development, highly respected and clearly stated,

make up the New Urbanism method of planning. New Urbanism values

and principles include, reconfiguring sprawling suburbs into livable,

walkable, diverse, mixed-use and transit-oriented communities. New

Urbanism aims to architect future sustainable communities that

celebrate local history, climate, ecology and building practice (Charter

of New Urbanism, 1993).

Background: Base Case

Suburbia arguably dominates the North American housing

environment; a higher proportion of North Americans now live in

suburbs than rural or urban areas. Almost one-half or 47% of the

United States population resides in suburbs (U.S. Bureau of the Census,

2000). In comparison, in 1820 only 7% of the American population

 4

lived in non-rural communities. Largely through the work of the Federal

Housing Administration (FHA) and the post-World War II GI Bill of

Rights, guaranteed mortgages and housing subsidies encouraged all

returning solders to return to civilian life by buying a home of their

own. As a result, this institutionalized suburbanization of America

became a symbol of the American way (Jackson, 1985).

Between 1950 and 1970, 83% of all growth in the United States

took place in suburbia (Muller, 1981). However, as a result of the

conventional planning practice of Euclidean zoning suburban growth

was developed in an unsustainable manner, segregating development

by use. Euclidean zoning not only makes it illegal for commercial land

usage, such as a convenience store, to be located within close

proximity to residential areas, it also stresses uniformity with minimum

setback, height, density and floor area ratios. This archaic paradigm of

single-use Euclidean zoning destroys community character, promotes

urban sprawl and is inherently vehicle-oriented (Purdy, 2007).

Conventional suburban landscapes are characterized by

buildings designed to be viewed as objects, set back in landscapes in

which they dominate. According to a 2009 American Housing Survey

the median size of an occupied home has grown from 1,610 square

feet in 1985 to 1,800 (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban

Development, 2010). In addition to larger homes, annual sprawl

increases the distance between homes, businesses, services and jobs

 5

costing local governments on average $750 on new infrastructure per

person or US$1 trillion in total annually and dramatically increasing

vehicular dependence, shown in the vehicle-miles traveled figure

below (Litman, 2015).

Traditionally catering to the needs of the automobile dependent

lower-density suburbs have been shopping malls, plazas and

commercial strips. Whether it is a doctors office, big box

development such as a Home Depot, or an Applebees; developed

along a main thoroughfare together make up a stereotypical suburban

corridor. These suburban corridors serve as a quasi-urban core in

suburban communities. Typically these corridors are uniformly

developed following the post-World War II neighborhood unit concept

and conventional zoned for single-use.

 6

To accommodate the proliferation of vehicles in suburban

communities, suburban corridors have distant setbacks with massive

amounts of frontal parking. Locally, the 16.81 million square foot

College Square Shopping Center located on state route 72 in Newark,

Delaware is a prime example of a typical unsustainable suburban plaza

that can be found in suburban corridors throughout the United States.

College Square Shopping Center is set hundreds of feet from the

closest sidewalk. While there exists mandated pedestrian access from

route 72, the sidewalks directing pedestrians from route 72 stop as the

mammoth parking lot begins, subsequently reappearing in front of the

large buildings within the plaza. The absence of continuous pedestrian

access, auto-scaled buildings and a sea of parking provide no sense of

place or community character and is inequitable for pedestrians. This

sea of parking is unnecessary as it is never even close to being half

full, as shown in the image below. This however is not a developer fault

but rather a result of minimum parking requirements. The former

Pathmark occupied 49,591 floor square feet in College Square

Shopping Center and according to New Castle County was required to

provide 10 parking spaces per 1,000 gross floor square feet, or 4,959

spaces total (New Castle County, 1981) (New Castle County).

 7

Not only is the unnecessary amount of parking required by

conventional zoning for suburban corridors esthetically displeasing, it

is also economically and environmentally unsustainable. Parking

requires a large presence of impervious surfaces, such as concrete and

asphalt. Conventional zoning exacerbates the effects of so many

impervious surfaces with increased flooding and damaging of local

water quality (Polycarpou, 2010). In addition to the environmental

impacts of the large presence of impervious surfaces in suburban

 8

corridors, is the economic impacts of shifts in shopper preference away

from uninviting shopping centers, malls etc. in favor human scaled and

walkable main street environments that emulate the experience of

downtown (Gardiner, 2011). Experts claim that the suburban

commercial model is on the decline, as shoppers turn to e-commerce

and prefer downtown experiences suburban shopping centers boasted

an 11% vacancy rate in 2010 (Schindler, 2012).

Sustainable Retrofitting of Suburban Corridors: Analysis

Dead malls and strip retail, old industrial and small tract houses

adjacent to transit stops make excellent retrofit sites. A fear of blight

also often trumps Not In My BackYard (NIMBY) resistance to New

Urbanist style retrofitting. In addition, support for environmental

consciousness is rapidly growing. Along with concerns of

environmental conditions is the concern over traffic and air quality.

With the worlds highest vehicle to person ratio of 1.3 people per

vehicle, traffic congestion and daily commutes are becoming

unbearable, triggering transient oriented developments (TODs)

(Wards Automotive Group, 2010).

Step one in retrofitting suburban corridors to achieve sustainable

outcomes is lessening the dependence on vehicles. One strategy is the

retrofitting of the corridor itself into a multiway boulevard. The

multiway boulevard is unique because its parallel roadways serve

distinctly different traffic functions. The multiway boulevard not only

 9

addresses the functional problem posed by the coexistence of through

movement and abutting land uses, but also easily accommodates

pedestrians, bicyclists and buses (Jacob; Macdonald; Rof, 2004).

Coupled with a streetscape initiative, broad pedestrian crossings and

trees can graciously line the medians as well as sidewalks to provide a

range of environmental aesthetics, access and safety to the

community.
While this strategy does not guarantee less dependence on

vehicles it does greatly improve the walkability, water runoff and

aesthetics of the corridor. Engineering analysis also estimates that

despite the reduction in road width and mix of modal uses in the

corridor, vehicle travel time through intersections should actually be

reduced by 11% (Nobel, 2007). Many traffic engineers do fear, however

that the complexity of the intersections will lead to high accident rates.

Although common in many countries multiway boulevards are many

times not a part of unified development codes in the United States, as

they have largely not been built since the 1930s. It is plausible to say

that multiway boulevards create a more walkable community however

may lead to high accident rates as they are largely unseen by

American drivers (Jones-Dunham; Williamson, 2009).

Step two in retrofitting suburban corridors to achieve sustainable

outcomes is revising conventional suburban zoning to more form-based

codes. Form-based codes stress the building placement and design as

paramount. Form-based codes embrace diversity and create distinct

 10

community character. Form-based codes often are applied to mixed-

use developments as together they are outgrowths of New Urbanism

(Purdy, 2007).
Together, retrofitting suburban corridors with form-based codes

and mixed-use development create extremely pedestrian-oriented

streetscapes. Mixed-use development greatly lessens ones

dependence on vehicles and influences more active behavior and

positive mental health, reducing traffic congestion, pollution and

obesity (Frumkin; Frank; Jackson, 2004). While the form-based codes is

able to prescribe the desired community vision of the design and

characteristics of the mixed-use development, creating a highly sought

after place to live. Mixed-use development is not only in market

demand but also an efficient use of land that challenges the paradigm

of urban sprawl. Mixed-use development also helps localize the

economy with much of the capital staying locally as commercial

developments are in close proximity to residential (Purdy, 2007).

The downside to these strategies is cost. While, form-based

codes and valuable mix-use real estate often economically benefit and

revitalize communities, they are more expensive. Form-based codes

tend to cost two to four times that of a conventional zoning ordinance,

due to initial efforts to detail inventory of urban form and create a

regulating plan (Purdy, 2007). Form-base codes are also very rigid and

developers may feel that this limits architects creativity. Mixed-use on

 11

the other hand is valuable real estate due to mix of resources nearby,

luxury apartments.

Three Es Policy Matrix

Three Es Multiway Form-Based Mixed-Use

Boulevard Code Development

Equity x x
Economy x x X
Environme x x X

nt

Judgment

Based on the information and research given. I believe it is

proven through the analysis described above. Judged on the criteria

explained in the introduction and visually shown through the policy

matrix, that indeed retrofitting suburban corridors can achieve

sustainable outcomes.

Recommendation
 12

I strongly recommend that form-base codes be incorporated into

suburban code ordnances. Form-based code creates a predictable

public realm by controlling physical form primarily, and land uses

secondarily. Form-based codes go beyond the conventional Euclidean

zoning. The front building line location is based upon the type of street

frontage. In a traditional downtown setting, there would be a zero

front lot line or build-to requirement with all parking required to be

at the rear of the building. In a residential neighborhood, there would

be a requirement that the front of a residence be placed at a specific

setback from the front lot line.

Another major improvement in the form-based code approach is

that it goes beyond just regulating the site, by rather tying together

the site and the public realm (i.e. the streetscape). Building regulations

relate to design requirements for streets, sidewalks, on- street parking,

street trees, and public spaces such as plazas and strip malls. An

important aspect of a form-based code is that all of the regulations be

tied together. The use is tied directly to the building type. The building

type in-turn dictates form and building elements. The building form

also relates to the street frontage, tying all of the elements together. In

the current suburban conditions of unconnected suburbs of

stereotypical shortsighted vehicle-dependent development, using form-

based codes to retrofit suburban corridors to create diverse and

consistent community character is overdue. Furthermore following the

 13

guidelines of form-base code will create a sense of place, revitalize

communities, greatly enhance connectivity and pedestrian-oriented

land use. All of which satisfy the New Urbanism principals and the

Three Es criteria provided to answer the research question.

 14

Works Cited

U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Special Reports. (2000).

Demographic Trends in the 20th Century.

Clark, G. E. (2007). Unsustainable suburbia. Environment, 49(8),

3-4.

Muller, Peter O. (1981). Contemporary Suburban America.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hill.
Chester, Mikhail, Arpad Horvath, and Samer Madanat. (2011).
Parking Infrastructure and The Environment. Access Vol. 39.
University of California.

Wards Automotive Group, Division of Penton Media INC. (2010).

Vehicles in Operation by Country.

World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987).

Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Purdy, J. (2007). Smart Growth Tactics. Michigan Association of

Planning, (28).

Jackson, Kenneth T. (1985). Crabgrass Frontier. New York: Oxford

University Press.

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2010).

U.S. homes today are bigger with more bedrooms and
bathrooms than 1973 [Press release].

Litman, T. (2015). Analysis of Public Policies That Unintentionally

Encourage and Subsidize Urban Sprawl (NCE Cities, Rep.).
Victoria Transport Policy Institute.

Gardiner, K. (2011). The Plight of The Suburban Neighborhood

Shopping Center [Scholarly project]. In M-Group.

New Castle County, Delaware Code of Ordinance, Supp No. 7

Update 1.
 15

New Castle County, Department of Land Use. (1981). Parcel

#1802100196.

The Charter of the New Urbanism | CNU. (1993).

Polycarpou, L. (2010). No More Pavement! The Problem of

Impervious Surfaces.

Schindler, Sarah. (2012). The Future of Abandoned Big Box

Stores: Legal Solutions to the Legacies of Poor Planning
Decisions. University of Colorado Law Review, Vol. 83.

Jones-Dunham, E., & Williamson, J. (2009). Retrofitting Suburbia:

Sustainable Suburbs.

Frumkin, H., Frank, L., & Jackson, R. (2004). The public health
impacts of sprawl.

Jacobs, A., Macdonald, E., Rof, Y. (2002). The Boulevard Book:

History, Evolution, Design of Multiway Boulevards. Cambridge.
MIT Press.
Nobel, P. (2007). Good Malls and Bad Cities. Metropolis.