Home » Land use (Page 3)
Category Archives: Land use
Another look at home location choices
I recently shared an article showing the results of a survey conducted in the US. That survey appears to show that Americans prefer sprawl. But that may be due to many factors including political leanings that are actually mentioned in the article. I share another article that appears to be a reaction to the first one.
Lewyn, M. (August 14, 2023) “Do Americans Really Prefer Sprawl?” Planetizen, https://www.planetizen.com/blogs/125112-do-americans-really-prefer-sprawl?utm_source=newswire&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news-08142023&mc_cid=cd3b2e2ba5&mc_eid=9ccfe464b1 [Last accessed: 8/16/2023]
To quote from the article:
“Why do these surveys yield such drastically different results? The Pew survey notes that 3/4 of rural respondents favor the less walkable alternative; thus, that survey was apparently designed to include a representative sample of Americans, including rural Americans who typically do live in very spread-out environments. It seems to me quite natural that rural Americans would prefer rural lifestyles.
But once rural respondents are excluded, the balance between sprawl and walkable communities in the Pew survey becomes almost a toss-up. 57 percent of urban respondents refer houses with smaller yards and more walkability, and an almost-equal percentage of suburban respondents prefer the opposite.”
Again, I wonder what would be the outcomes if a similar survey were done in the Philippines. Will it reveal preferences for single detached homes rather than condos? Who will prefer the latter or the former? What could be the factors affecting home location choices in the Philippines? Cost is definitely a major factor. Commuting times perhaps and even commuting costs? But how do people weigh these factors? And what other influences are there to the decisions to purchase homes?
–
On home location preferences
There’s an interesting article on the preference of Americans for big houses even if these
(August 2, 2023) “Majority of Americans prefer a community with big houses, even if local amenities are far away,” Pew Research Center, https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/02/majority-of-americans-prefer-a-community-with-big-houses-even-if-local-amenities-are-farther-away/ [Last accessed: 8/12/2023]
Quoting from the article:
“A majority of Americans (57%) say they would prefer to live in a community where “houses are larger and farther apart, but schools, stores and restaurants are several miles away,” according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted March 27-April 2, 2023. About four-in-ten (42%) would prefer a community where “houses are smaller and closer to each other, but schools, stores and restaurants are within walking distance.”
As general as that statement appears to be, as they say, “the devil is in the details.” The article goes to qualify the statistics according to partisanship, age, education, race and ethnicity, ideology, community type, and community type & partisanship. The resulting stats are quite revealing and helps one understand the survey results.
I wonder what would be the result of a similar survey if one were conduced in the Philippines. There is no partisanship factor here that is similar to the characteristics of Republicans and Democrats in the US. What will it reveal about our preferences? Do Filipinos prefer to have their own houses even if these are located far from workplaces and schools? Or do Filipinos prefer living closer to their workplaces and schools even if it means living in smaller homes? Certainly affordability, which was not mentioned in the article, is a major factor considering the cost of homes in cities compared to prices in the suburbs.
There is a link in the article for the methodology and questions used in the study. That means it would be possible to replicate or adapt these for the Philippine setting.
–
Article on “Fair Share Transportation Planning”
I am sharing this new article from Todd Litman on fair share transportation planning. The content is relevant and very timely in the Philippines considering many people including and especially transport officials are struggling with the thought of allocating resources to provide or improve facilities geared towards more equitable transport systems (e.g., more facilities for active transport).
Here’s the summary as quoted from the article:
“To be efficient and equitable, a transportation system must serve diverse demands. A diverse transportation system allows travelers to use the most efficient option for each trip—safe walking and bicycling for local errands, efficient public transit when traveling on busy travel corridors, and automobiles when they are truly the most cost-effective mode considering all impact—and it ensures that people who cannot, should not, or prefer not to drive receive their fair share of public investments.
Current transportation planning practices are biased in various ways that overinvest in automobile infrastructure and underinvest in more affordable, inclusive, and efficient modes. It is time for planners to reconsider our analysis methods and funding practices to ensure that non-auto modes, and therefore non-drivers, receive their fair share of transportation resources.
This is not anti-car. Motorists have good reasons to support more investments in non-auto modes that reduce their traffic and parking congestion, reduce their chauffeuring burdens and crash risk, and provide better options when their vehicles are unavailable. Everybody wins from a more diverse and efficient transportation system.”
New reclamations at Manila Bay
As our plane approached to land at NAIA yesterday, I saw the current extent of the reclamation projects underway at the Manila Bay.
These projects are expensive to implement and will surely lead to even higher real estate prices. This will translate to expensive office, commercial and residential units. So one wonders who will ultimately benefit from these developments. Will government come in and require low cost housing here or will future workers have to commute to these places from the suburbs? The latter will definitely put more pressure on an already deficient transport system.
–
Push and Pull: The Link Between Walkability and Affordability
Here is a quick share of an article about the link between walkability and affordable housing.
To quote:
“While early pandemic pundits predicted the ‘death’ of urban areas, recent trends show that people—perhaps more than ever—value the benefits of compact development and easily accessible amenities and services. But “Demand drives up costs and can reduce low- and moderate-income households’ opportunity to live in highly walkable areas,” the report warns.”
Source: Push and Pull: The Link Between Walkability and Affordability
Some people seem to be baffled why people choose to purchase homes and reside in the suburbs or away from the city centers. It is actually simpler than what many tend to overthink and attribute purely to the condition of our transportation system. It takes two (or more apparently) to tango and housing affordability is critical for the Philippines’ case.
–
Why do we keep widening roads?
I’m just going to share this article here. The article from The NY Times asks a question that has been bugging planners and engineers, particularly those who are in government and perhaps under the agencies like the DPWH, DOTr and NEDA. This also applies to planners, engineers and those from other disciplines involved in transportation infrastructure development and particularly roads or highways.
–
Another definition of the 15-minute city
We begin 2023 with an informative article defining the “15-minute city”. This is actually an entry in Planetizen’s Planopedia, which contains definitions of fundamental concepts in urban planning:
Ionescu, D. (December 2022) “What is a 15-minute City?” Planetizen, https://www.planetizen.com/definition/15-minute-city?utm_source=newswire&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news-12292022&mc_cid=ee083e2ee7&mc_eid=9ccfe464b1 [Last accessed: 1/1/2023]
I’ve written and shared articles about this concept before. Here are a couple from 2021 where I offered my opinions about the concept as already applied in the Philippines:
https://d0ctrine.com/2021/08/13/on-defining-the-15-minute-city/
https://d0ctrine.com/2021/04/07/didnt-we-already-have-15-minute-cities-and-towns-in-the-philippines/
–
On making streets safer through woonerfs
One of the new things I learned when I was taking up transportation planning as an undergraduate student in the 1990s was about the woonerf. Our teacher then was a Visiting Professor from the Tokyo Institute of Technology. He introduced to us many concepts in that elective course that paved the way to a number of us proceeding to specialize in transportation. What is a woonerf? Well, here’s a nice article defining the woonerf and providing some examples:
Ionescu, D. (October 6, 2022) “What is a Woonerf?” Planetizen, https://www.planetizen.com/definition/woonerf?utm_source=newswire&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news-10062022&mc_cid=9d60b3d668&mc_eid=9ccfe464b1 [Last accessed: 10/10/2022]
To quote from the article:
“Translated as “living street,” a woonerf employs strategies like traffic calming devices and low speed limits to force drivers to slow down and safely share street space with pedestrians, cylists, and others, often without raised curbs separating cars and pedestrians. In the Netherlands, where the woonerf originated in the 1960s, motorized traffic within woonerf zones is limited to walking speed…
…A woonerf is not a pedestrianized street, but rather one where multiple users and vehicles co-exist. However, a woonerf can be converted to car-free uses using bollards or other barriers. The woonerf maintains utilitarian uses like loading docks and parking while making the roadway safer and more accessible to non-drivers.”
There should be many applications to the woonerf in the Philippines especially in areas where the dominant land use is residential and through traffic should be discouraged. This is goes well with the complete streets concept that is now being promoted and in fact pre-dates the concept and was well ahead of its time.
–
On development density and transportation
The term ‘density’ here does not refer to transport or traffic density in the traffic engineering sense but to density of development such as urban density or building density. Here is an interesting article about building during a climate crisis. While it is very much applicable to any situation, the need to revisit plans and designs has become more urgent with the current pandemic.
Alter, L. (November 19, 2021) “What’s the Right Way to Build in a Climate Crisis?” Tree Hugger, https://www.treehugger.com/what-is-right-way-to-build-in-climate-crisis-5210156 [Last accessed: 2/23/2022]
There are mentions to various references throughout the article so it is not entirely an opinion piece but supported by evidence or studies. There is also a note that the article has been fact-checked. Quoting from the article:
“Adding gentle density can help ensure there are enough people in a neighborhood to support local schools, health, and community services and keep shops and restaurants open. It can provide a range of housing types and tenures that support the needs of individuals and families throughout all stages of life and allow for aging in place. It can also support public transit services, providing residents with efficient and affordable transportation options without relying on private automobiles.”
What do you think is the ‘right’ density for Philippine cities and municipalities?
–
Article on evaluating transport equity
Here is another quick share of an article on transportation equity:
Litman, T. (February 2, 2022) “Evaluating Transportation Equity: ITE Quickbite,” Planetizen, https://www.planetizen.com/news/2022/02/116058-evaluating-transportation-equity-ite-quickbite [Last accessed: 2/4/2022]
Transportation equity is a very relevant, very timely topic as people in the Philippines are just beginning to understand and weigh the advantages of having more efficient transport in the forms of active and public transport over private vehicles.
–
Caught (up) in traffic 