From the reflection by Joe Dziemianowicz, who was recently in town with his partner:

When it comes to painstaking and loving preservation, Savannah is a jewel box — actually 22 of them. The historic district, which measures about 2 1/2 square miles, comprises 22 lush garden-like little parks that were the brainchild of 18th century city planner James Oglethorpe.

Think of Manhattanâ€s Gramercy Park, minus the forbidding fences and locked gates and with Spanish moss dangling lazily from the branches of ancient oak trees.

Monterey Square is probably the most trafficked of the 22. It is home to the Mercer-Williams House, which was designed in the 1800s for the great-grandfather of Johnny Mercer, the songwriter famous for pop standards from “Moon River” to “Fools Rush In.”

But each square has its own personality, statues, stories and claims to fame.

Like Johnson Square, the oldest, which dates to 1733. Approaching the little green space, we figured that the monument standing tall was for somebody named Johnson. Not so. The monument is to Revolutionary War hero Nathanael Greene.

Of course, Monterey Square doesn’t see anywhere near as much traffic as, say, Ellis Square, but oh well.

But I like how the piece focuses so much on the squares. The piece also nods to the ongoing fascination with John Berendt’s Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil. Tourists don’t come to town just because of The Book in the numbers they used to — it’s almost 20 years old after all. But the interest might never fully fade.

From my own Instagram account, a shot of Madison Square with the Jasper statue, one of the squares given special attention in the piece:

It looks like public money will be spent to improve drainage along President Street and offer access to the site. But what will be there? That’s really not our decision.

Over the last couple of years, SRL has been floated as the site for a cruise ship terminal (not happening), a new stadium for the Sand Gnats (not likely anytime soon), and a possible site for a new civic arena (very unlikely, I’d say).

Since the site is not publicly owned, any civic use would likely come at a very high cost.

The likeliest outcome probably is the incremental development of the site for a variety of private uses.

But it’s worth remembering and emphasizing that the original ambitions for the site included an extension of General Oglethorpe’s grid system. The Oglethorpe Plan has served Savannah well for 280 years.

There have been various signals over the last couple of years that the current owners have all but scrapped the idea of expanding the grid.

Consider this from Eric Curl’s Cost to finish, repair Savannah River Landing site: $2.3M:

Court documents indicate the new owner may not be planning to develop the property as it was originally envisioned.

In response to a request for a $2.3 million payment in January, attorney David Lotz, who represented ALR, said the company is not responsible for sewer work that may not be needed due to the potential modification of the propertyâ€s proposed use.

“It is our understanding that, in prior conversations between ALR and Purchaser, Purchaser representatives indicated that the site would not be utilized in the current configuration,” Lotz said.

The “current configuration” is one that attracted worldwide praise before the financial crisis and housing bust.

Consider this New York Times article from 2007: Savannah Adds to the Master Plan of 1733. From that piece:

More than four years ago, the cityâ€s economic development agency hired Christian Sottile, a Savannah-based urban planner, to update the Oglethorpe plan, which is now guiding the development of Amblingâ€s 54-acre site. Mr. Sottile will be continuing a pattern of development that last had a major addition in 1856.

“Whatâ€s so unique about Savannah River Landing, we were able to reach back 150 years and continue a history of urbanism native to this place,” said Mr. Sottile, who teaches urban planning and design at the Savannah College of Art and Design.

“With a conventional master plan, which often foresees all of the buildings from Day 1,” he said, “you freeze in time the mix of uses. This is the opposite. Itâ€s town-building. The streets come first, public spaces come first, and the blocks become spaces for building, which are not prescribed. Itâ€s highly unusual for American cities.”

The developer is planning to build more than two million square feet of new space, including 2 hotels; 150,000 square feet of prime office space; 200,000 square feet of retail space; 4 condo buildings; 17 riverfront estates; and 110 town homes. The city is also extending the historic river walk by 2,000 feet.

The public spaces — the new streets and squares — were to have been deeded back to the city.

As recently as 2010, the owners indicated in a Savannah Morning News article that they were committed to the Sottile’s extension of the Oglethorpe Plan, but there were reasons to doubt that commitment even at the time. Further doubts prompted my spring 2012 post Savannah River Landing: will Oglethorpe plan be part of its future?

A reminder of what that would have looked like (General McIntosh Boulevard is on the far left of this small map, with President Street Extension at the bottom):

The original developers envisioned an absurdly quick timeline for this development. The ambition, which seems absurd in retrospect, and the utter collapse of the plans were both results of the nuttiness of the bubble years.

But the failure doesn’t mean that the basic configuration isn’t a good one — one that could serve the city well for decades, maybe even centuries.

Perhaps a few elements could be tweaked to allow a couple of larger buildings on the fringes of the site, but the core idea — the extension of the squares and of mixed use development — is sound.

A new vision of incremental city-building is unlikely to satisfy the profit motive of the current owners, however.

Nor will it address public concerns about wasted tax money. It seems at times that public officials and taxpayers would settle for any development on the site, as long as property tax revenue increased to help pay for costly improvements that have already been made or are about to be made.

I don’t know if it would be worth the time and effort, but I hope that city officials, the Downtown Neighborhood Association, Historic Savannah Foundation, local preservationists, and others will exert whatever pressure they can to make sure that some semblance of the Oglethorpe plan, as extended in the original vision for SRL, survives.

From Kevin Klinkenberg:

I canâ€t tell you how many plans Iâ€ve read where a city used language to tout itself something akin to “The New American City” or “Americaâ€s 21st Century City.” Itâ€s in the nature of our country that cities pair civic boosterism with a faith in the future. The result is that cities spend a lot of time trying to stake claims that theyâ€re THE place to be now and in the future. Of course, most of the time this is just bluster.

At the same time, older historic cities such as Savannah spend a great deal of their energy emphasizing their past. And, rightfully so. Itâ€s an old story by now that Savannah has one of the best-planned and most beautiful historic districts in America. Oglethorpeâ€s plan for the city and the Georgia colony is remarkable for its depth of thought and its execution. Anyone who has an interest in planning and hasnâ€t read Thomas Wilsonâ€s The Oglethorpe Plan should go out and buy it right now (at a local bookstore preferably).

But while the story of Savannahâ€s past is well-known, what about its present and future? Is Savannah a model for what American cities should aspire to become today and for the near future? And by that I mean not only the landmark historic district, but also the southside, the islands and all of the surrounding area. Sticking strictly to issues of urban planning and design, I propose that Savannah is absolutely a model for the rest of the country for two reasons that are key to issues of our time.

Choice of lifestyle

To anyone who observes these things, itâ€s clear that we essentially have two broad choices for living in cities in America. People can choose to live somewhere where walking, biking or taking public transportation is a daily part of life, which we generally call urban; or people can choose to live somewhere where life is centered around driving, which we generally call suburbia. Put very simply, those are the two different systems or lifestyles at our disposal, excluding a rural or agricultural life.

Since the overwhelming majority of development since the 1940â€s has been oriented to driving, most cities have far more landscape devoted to suburbia than to urbanity. While this push was originally driven by the emergence of the car, and the desire for a more “modern” lifestyle, like all things it was taken to extremes far beyond its original intent.

Hereâ€s what weâ€ve learned in the last twenty years or so in a nutshell: the market demand for suburbia has been vastly overstated, and the market for urbanity has been drastically under-served. Far more people want a comfortable, beautiful place to live where they can walk and bike than what planners and developers realized. This is not to say that people donâ€t want suburbia. In fact, many people still prefer it. But itâ€s clear by now that the choice to live in a walkable place isnâ€t old-fashioned or outmoded: itâ€s a rational lifestyle preference.

In a big-picture sense then, Savannah is a model for the current reality because it provides meaningful choices. For those who prefer urbanity, the city has a first-class collection of walkable neighborhoods. They contain everything necessary for success: a robust street grid, abundant and well-placed public spaces, a wide mix of housing options and remarkable beauty. And importantly, itâ€s sizable enough to provide a complete lifestyle.

At the same time, the region has a vast collection of suburban areas that act almost as their own ecosystem. For those who wish to spend their weekends driving to Home Depot or the Mall and fighting traffic, that opportunity exists in abundance. Sorry – canâ€t resist a little snarkiness.

The stark differences between everything north and south of DeRenne, as well as the Islands, show not an unhealthy juxtaposition but rather the opposite: two systems living side-by-side in one community, with a little something for everyone. Each system of course has room for improvement, but thatâ€s a subject for future pieces.

The broader point is that American cities need to provide for both lifestyle options. If you have nearly all suburbia and very little urban, youâ€d better focus on making the urban as good as it can be since a sizable percentage of the population wants it. Thatâ€s actually the task for more cities than not in 2013. But by the same token, letâ€s not throw the baby out with the bathwater if youâ€re a city that has a good mix of both urban and suburban. Until we completely run out of cheap energy and/or canâ€t afford the infrastructure cost, there will be a strong market for suburbia. Letâ€s embrace it for what it is and make it as good as it can be.

Scale of Development

It does feel these days that weâ€re finally clear of the depths of the real estate recession that began in 2007. Building activity is up, banks are lending again, and home building is surging. That said, the reality of life after the bubble burst is that weâ€re likely not to see lending or projects of the scale that dominated real estate from the 1980â€s through the 2000â€s. The dominant mode of building for a number of years will be smaller-scale projects and very modest amounts of speculative construction. Thatâ€s not all bad; in fact, in my mind itâ€s a wiser approach for everyone to take in the industry.

What does that mean for cities and the world of development? It means weâ€ll see far more projects that build on a couple of lots rather than an entire block; it means the giant master-planned projects which made cities drool will be few and far between; and it means cities that have simple street grids, modern zoning codes and a flexible platting system will be prepared for success.

Again, in that arena Savannah has much to teach America. In case you hadnâ€t noticed, thereâ€s a mini-boom of redevelopment projects occurring all over the historic neighborhoods of the city. It seems each week I notice another new sign or another new foundation for more townhomes, homes or apartments. But instead of 200 apartments all being built at once on one site, theyâ€re scattered on numerous sites at intervals of 3, 4, or 5 homes.

While General Oglethorpe could never have truly imagined what Savannah would grow into, he put in a place a framework that has allowed its constant change and growth. The system of public spaces, streets and lots creates a virtually idyllic system for small-scale development and redevelopment. That system worked well in the cityâ€s 19th century boom periods, and itâ€s working well again in the 21st century. Itâ€s even a key element to how the Savannah River Landing site was designed, and I imagine weâ€ll see a gradual development of it over the years. The approach of creating a thoughtful plan and planning for quality, incremental growth is likely to be the norm in outlying areas as well.

Finally, I canâ€t resist a final note on the system that Oglethorpe put in place, and its relevance to the rest of America. The size of a ward in Savannah is typically 675â€x675â€, or about 10.5 acres. Following adoption of the National Land Ordinance of 1785 we put in place a gridded system of sections starting in Ohio that was based on the mile grid. The infamous quarter-section of development that became ubiquitous across the west is 160 acres, or ¼ mile by 1 mile. That was very often subdivided into blocks of 660â€x660â€, or even 660â€x320â€. The 10 acre square block of 660†is often known as the Mormon block in Utah, Idaho and other western states. It was used as the foundation for over 700 towns across the west. Shaving just a few feet of street ROW out of Oglethorpeâ€s ward model makes it fit very neatly in that standard western American block size. If thereâ€s a better model for how to design and build a livable 10 acres, I sure havenâ€t seen it (and believe me Iâ€ve looked).

Some shots of infill development right now in the downtown area (all photos by Kevin Klinkenberg):

And a couple of graphics that give a sense of the scale of Savannah:

Savannah from Gwinnett to Bay laid over the typical mile-square grid. This particular version is north of Dallas.

A Savannah ward over the Salt Lake City grid (the 10 acre blocks) from Gwinnett to Bay laid over the typical mile-square grid.

Casual readers might see my newspaper work as a series of isolated rants, but many of the issues fall under the crucial umbrella of accessibility. In the column, I mention various civic moves that have both increased access to public spaces (the Ellis Square project, the Price Street redesign) and decreased public access, including the recent and really misguided idea to try to force many St. Patrick’s Day drinkers to buy special wristbands to engage in the otherwise legal activity of drinking outdoors in portions of the Historic District.

Let me add a few more thoughts here.

When we’re talking about accessibility (including but not limited to handicap accessibility), we need to consider key elements:

• architecture and other elements of the built environment — are they straightforward ways to get from here to there?
• affordability — can people afford to go there? and afford to do something once they’re there?
• security — do people feel safe?
• esthetics — is the place pleasing to be in? does one really want to be there?
• transportation — is the place accessible to people from a wide range of backgrounds utilizing a range of transportation options?

One project that I did not mention in the column is the planned but so far totally unfunded removal of the I-16 flyover. I’ve detailed in previous posts and columns some of the economic, historical, cultural, and even transportation-related reasons for the removal. That project is all about slightly restricting the speed with which inbound drivers can get into the city while at the same time improving accessibility for outbound drivers, for pedestrians, and for cyclists.

Part of the reason Savannah impresses so many for its walkability is the presence of such frequent streets in the grid originally established by James Oglethorpe — the so-called Oglethorpe Plan. The presence of frequent streets is also a bedrock of Jane Jacobs’ theories about effective urban planning. The grid system is wonderful for dispersing traffic, but more importantly it arms citizens using many forms of transportation with a plethora of choices. Those choices stimulate civic engagement. The places on the grid that we’ve most disrupted the pattern — around the Civic Center and Courthouse, around the I-16 flyover — are the most forbidding and most difficult areas to access in all of downtown.

For more detailed info, see my posts Restoring the Oglethorpe Plan as much as possible: the arguments arenâ€t just historical, The I-16 flyover removal and traffic flow, and Tom Wilson talks to GPBâ€s Orlando Montoya about the Oglethorpe Plan.

I’m sure I’ll keep returning to this theme as long as I’m writing columns and as long as I’m writing about urban issues.

Tom Wilson did some great work as a planner with the Metropolitan Planning Commission and has been workign for the last few years on his new book, The Oglethorpe Plan: Enlightenment Design in Savannah and Beyond, published by the University of Virginia Press.

From the publisher’s website:

In his new book, the professional planner Thomas D. Wilson reconsiders the Oglethorpe Plan, revealing that Oglethorpe was a more dynamic force in urban planning than has generally been supposed. In essence, claims Wilson, the Oglethorpe Plan offers a portrait of the Enlightenment, and embodies all of the major themes of that era, including science, humanism, and secularism. The vibrancy of the ideas behind its conception invites an exploration of the plan’s enduring qualities. In addition to surveying historical context and intellectual origins, this book aims to rescue Oglethorpeâ€s work from its relegation to the status of a living museum in a revered historic district, and to demonstrate instead how modern-day town planners might employ its principles.

And here’s Orlando’s great interview with Tom, which also quotes urban designer and SCAD dean Christian Sottile:

And from the text of GPB’s Lofty Ideals Are On The Map In Savannah:

When most people walk around downtown Savannah, they see old homes, churches, monuments and trees.

But through Tom Wilson’s eyes, the old historic district looks like a grid of streets and parks in a kind of circuit-board pattern on a map that goes by a specific name.

“Well, in six years as the director of comprehensive planning for Savannah and Chatham County, I repreatedly heard people talking about the Oglethorpe Plan,” Wilson says. “And it seemed that everybody had a different idea of what it was.”

Click here for some of my thoughts about the Oglethorpe Plan’s relevance today.

I have not yet had a chance to read Tom’s book, but I hope to get to it soon.

Savannahâ€s surging downtown defies downturn

The article opens:

SAVANNAH — A city center that Atlanta and plenty of other cities dream about is the reality here.

Downtown Savannah teems with tourists and college students stroll past coffeehouses and restaurants in an eminently walkable urban environment. Chocolate shops sit side-by-side with art galleries, bawdy bars and boutique stores, creating the type of seamless mixed-use environment that developers dream of manufacturing.

Though long been known for walkability, downtown Savannah wasnâ€t always this way. Sections were plagued with empty storefronts and lagging foot traffic just a decade ago. A fresh influx of tourists, a renewed focus on the “creative class” and Savannah College of Art & Designâ€s unorthodox growth strategy have led to a downtown renassaince.

Atlanta certainly doesnâ€t have the waterfront lure or historic charm of its older cousin. But the importance of a pedestrian-friendly downtown and Savannahâ€s careful cultivation of a vibe that appeals to a wide swath of residents and tourists may hold lessons.

Residents turned out in droves for Fashion’s Night Out on Broughton Street

“The economy has changed, but the plan doesnâ€t need to,” said Sottile, referencing the city squares that Gen. James Oglethorpe laid out almost 300 years ago. “It survived the American Revolution, the Civil War and the 20th Century. And now itâ€s defining sustainability in the 21st Century.”

For an upbeat insider’s view of how Savannah has weathered the downturn, take a look at Tommy Linstroth’s recent post on The Creative Coast blog: Here for the Long Haul.

In a recent column, I noted that by year’s end we could be close to full occupancy on Broughton Street again, despite the long hangover from the recession.

Sure, Savannah has lots of problems, but those who don’t dwell on the problems and who forge ahead trying to get stuff done are making dramatic positive changes to the city.

First, let’s recall the excellent New York Times piece from 2007 about the Savannah River Landing site (that big tract of land east of the Marriott along the riverfront): Savannah Adds to the Master Plan of 1733 Many of us already had doubts about the project when that piece was published in spring 2007, but I and some other doubters were too quiet in raising them (not that it would have made much difference one way or the other).

From that NYT piece, which was published about 7 months before the country entered the deepest recession since the Great Depression:

As one of the oldest planned cities in the country, Savannah is known for compact, walkable streets and beautifully landscaped historic squares. Designed by the cityâ€s founder, James Oglethorpe, in 1733, it has remained largely intact even as electricity and cars were introduced, though buildings have changed uses over time.

It is precisely this longevity that the Ambling Companies hopes to build on with the largest expansion of the historic downtown since Oglethorpe first envisioned it. Savannah River Landing, an $800 million mixed-use development currently under way, will extend the city east along the Savannah River on land that Oglethorpe platted but never made use of.

More than four years ago, the cityâ€s economic development agency hired Christian Sottile, a Savannah-based urban planner, to update the Oglethorpe plan, which is now guiding the development of Amblingâ€s 54-acre site. Mr. Sottile will be continuing a pattern of development that last had a major addition in 1856.

“Whatâ€s so unique about Savannah River Landing, we were able to reach back 150 years and continue a history of urbanism native to this place,” said Mr. Sottile, who teaches urban planning and design at the Savannah College of Art and Design.

Savannah River Landing would have created six new squares, and — as noted in the piece — would have been connected to downtown through likely changes to the current street pattern at the northeast end of downtown. That over time probably would have meant the elimination of the diagonal General McIntosh Boulevard and the recreation of gridded north-south and east-west blocks. (I guarantee if would have worked on many levels better than what we have now.)

Savannah River Landing as an extension of the Oglethorpe plan and street grid

PSP Investments has hired a local consultant to work with those partners and others to plan the development’s future.

City of Savannah officials said they look forward to those talks. The city government never feared the project would collapse, said Assistant City Manager Chris Morrill.

“We always knew this was a unique development on the East Coast,” Morrill said. “We’re in this for the long term.”

The city’s concern going forward is in the project remaining true to its master plan. Designed to be an extension of Savannah’s historic district, the Savannah River Landing was to incorporate parks, squares and tree-lined streets. Of the site’s 54 acres, 25 were to be public space.

The city wants the “new players” to keep “the public realm connected,” Morrill said.

“And we don’t see that changing,” he said.

I never shared Morrill’s optimism from two years ago that the plan would be or even could be preserved. (Morrill is of course now city manager in Roanoke.)

From this week’s New stadium could spur development on Savannah River Landing, property manager says:

The Savannah River Landing project, which broke ground in 2008, stalled when the economy did. The original concept, developed by Ambling Companies, called for an $800 million investment that would bring a mix of two hotels, 600 condominiums, 110 town homes, 17 million-dollar waterfront homes and about 50 shops and retail stores.

That plan, and the design meant to mimic the Oglethorpe grid pattern of historic downtown, may be revised in the current economy.

“The vision looked beautiful on paper, but Iâ€ve never seen any feasibility study that supported the amount of retail and residential on it,” Burgstiner said.

Given that, the look of the project could change, too.

“Probably a lot of the plan that is there will stay, but a lot of it will change,” he said.

These are interesting discussions.

I’m particularly interested to know from that piece quoted directly above that the Savannah River Landing owners seem willing to be flexible about land use and even land acquisition. Since an open air stadium would need only about 20% of the site, there’s reason to think a deal could be worked out despite the fact that the owners likely have tens of millions of dollars tied up in the site.

And it’s always been tantalizing to consider various uses that would be suitable for a site in such close proximity to downtown — a movie theater, for example.

But there will definitely be something lost if all or even part of the existing plan to extend the Oglethorpe grid is altered.

At the end of the day, as I keep noting, Savannah River Landing is privately owned, but we can certainly help guide its use and future development — something will happen there sometime — through close attention and informed discussion. And perhaps through direct investment.

For those who have forgotten, Savannah River Landing was a massive, $800-million, mixed-use private development at the eastern end of River Street that attracted millions in city infrastructure spending before the whole plan collapsed after the recession hit.

Still, as recently as last June, city officials seemed convinced — or maybe they were just convincing themselves? — that we’d still eventually see a major development similar to the original plan, which attracted national attention because of the extension of the Oglethorpe grid. From the NYT in 2007: Savannah Adds to the Master Plan of 1733

Back to 2012: Savannah voters have already approved sales tax funding for a new arena, but the economic downturn and other issues left us about $100 million short for arena funding. At the same time, the city is getting pressure from the owners of the single A Savannah Sand Gnats that they need a new stadium better than the historic but limited Grayson Stadium in Daffin Park.

Today in the SMN, Lesley Conn does a great job updating us on the current issues in play and the continued push for a new stadium — usable for baseball, concerts, and other events — in the downtown area, preferably at the Savannah River Landing site: Savannah council considers new stadium with SPLOST funding

It’s a pretty straightforward idea: divert $22 million currently set aside for the arena, which was the cornerstone of the city’s campaign to pass the last Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax, to a new open-air stadium, and then come back to voters next year for a new round of SPLOST that would include full arena funding. That’s assuming, of course, that voters approve another round of SPLOST, which adds 1% to all sales taxes in Chatham County. The Sand Gnats would also need to put millions into the project (the construction bill would likely be $50 million or more) and commit to a long-term lease.

From Lesley’s piece, which is well worth a full read:

Because the stadium also would serve as a multi-use facility, it could be paid for with money from the 2006 SPLOST allocation, which stated in the referendum that the 1-cent special purpose local option sales tax would help fund an arena as well as “cultural and recreational facilities.”

Once the stadium is under way, the city would ask voters to approve a new SPLOST, which could happen in 2013, and would specifically earmark the new tax monies for an arena.

That would give the city time to raise money, study a site and determine how an arena could complement a stadium and the Johnny Mercer Theater.

City officials and Jason Freier, chief executive officer of Hardball Capital, parent company of the Gnats, say the stadium is a separate discussion from the arena talks. A stadium would serve separate needs from a traditional, indoor, enclosed arena.

Fort Wayne's Parkview Field being used for a wedding

But there’s one key point that doesn’t make its way into the Savannah Morning News article today:

What do the current owners of Savannah River Landing have to say about this?

There’s an awful lot of chatter online about the site and there seems to be a presumption that “we” — meaning Savannah as a whole — has final say in what happens there. But the 54-acre site is owned by an investment group controlled by a Canadian pension fund. They have many tens of millions of dollars already wrapped up in the Savannah River Landing site, and it seems pointless to identify that as a dream site for a stadium without a clear grasp of what it would take to get the land.

As for the idea itself, I’d say it’s an intriguing one — and certainly better than the idea of an indoor facility on that prime land.

And, yes, Savannah could really use a prime outdoor space like this. In proximity to downtown, the Sand Gnats would also be a tourist draw to a degree that they are not now.

Will the public buy into this, considering the promises regarding the arena? I don’t know the answer to that one.