Principles of Placemaking Guide

Principles of
Community Placemaking
and Making Places Special:
Professional Guide
By Steve Grabow
Professor and Community Development Educator

University of Wisconsin-Extension
Jefferson County Office
May 1, 2009
Version
Acknowledgements The project also benefited from the contributions of
several of the most prominent community design
organizations in Wisconsin. They have participated
The author acknowledges a long list of people in a 2006 “Placemaking Imagery Forum” and/or
and organizations who have contributed to this have provided other assistance. Each organization,
publication. In particular, I recognize the University the participating principles and their contact
of Wisconsin-Extension (UWEX) “Downtown Vitality information is provided in the Project Contributors
and Community Placemaking Team”. While the and Resources section.
membership of this team has varied, the leadership
of colleagues Chuck Law from the UWEX Local Appreciation is also extended to the many local
Government Center and Bill Ryan from the UWEX officials and citizens who have participated in
Center for Community Economic Development the extensive planning activities in Jefferson
(CCED) has been greatly appreciated. In addition, County and within the various public, nonprofit
the team’s Graphic Imagery Work Group made and business communities. The support from
major contributions to the project by planning a leaders and participants in the many formal and
Placemaking Forum and assisting in the selection informal initiatives related to community planning,
of a vast array of images for this project. This work community placemaking and community livability
group included the author and Sue Thering from is admired and greatly valued.
the University of Wisconsin-Madison Department
of Landscape Architecture and Dan Wilson A debt of gratitude is extended to Linda Woolridge
now Professor Emeritus. Other members of the from the UWEX Jefferson County Office, who
Placemaking Team included Matt Kures from the has provided continuously high quality program
UWEX CCED, Bill Rizzo from UWEX Dane County, support to this effort. Her administrative
Dale Mohr from UWEX Oconto County, Will proficiencies for this and countless other projects
Andresen from UWEX Iron County, Jim Resick from are sincerely appreciated.
UWEX Outagamie County, Tim Kane from UWEX
Ashland County, and Dan Kuzlik from UWEX Oneida
County. Interim State Program Director Tom Blewett
has also been, very supportive of this effort and has
expedited special funding resources.
Special mention for inspiring this work is given

to Gene Bunnell, former UWEX Specialist and
faculty member in the UW-Madison Department of
Urban and Regional Planning. Gene’s research on
placemaking significantly informed this document.
He is now with the Department of Geography and
Planning at the University of Albany, New York.
The author also extends special thanks to

Margaret Burlingham from LanDesign by Margaret
Burlingham and Becky Folgert Mehringer, a
Project Assistant. These Jefferson County residents
are talented landscape architects and design
professionals who have assisted in photography,
image selection, PowerPoint presentation and
publication format design.
Principles of Community Placemaking &

Table of Contents
Context for Principles, Definition of Placemaking & Format....................................................................ii
Functional Area I: Effective and Functional Physical Configuration......................................................1
Principle 1: Compact Communities and Clear Urban/Rural Differentiation..........................2
Principle 2: Strong Urban Center..........................................................................................................3
Principle 3: City-centered Redevelopment and Infill....................................................................4
Principle 4: Integration of Housing and Employment..................................................................5
Principle 5: Vital, Distinctive and Varied Neighborhoods ...........................................................6
Principle 6: Avoidance of Low-density Residential Development on the Urban Fringe..7
Principle 7: A Mix of Housing Types and Households with Different Income Levels.........8
Functional Area II: User-Friendly and Efficient Circulation......................................................................9

Principle 8: Pedestrian and Bike Friendly Environments...........................................................10
Principle 9: High Quality and Convenient Public Transit and Transportation...................11
Functional Area III: Preserved Natural and Cultural Resources and Environment........................13
Principle 10: Environmental Resources and Parks: Preserved and Consciously
Integrated into the Fabric of the Community.....................................................14
Principle 11: Preserved Farmland and Related Open Space....................................................15
Principle 12: Historic and Cultural Resources Consciously Preserved i
and Integrated Contemporary Settings.................................................................16
Functional Area IV: Enhanced Local Identity and Sense of Place........................................................17

Principle 13: Strong Local Character, Community Identity and a Sense of Place..............18
Principle 14: Well-designed Public Buildings and Public Spaces
Enlivened by Work of Art and Sculpture...............................................................19
Functional Area V: Attributes to Instinctively Draw Us to Places........................................................21

Principle 15: Connectivity.....................................................................................................................22
Principle 16: Drama and Dignity: Real Places...............................................................................23
Principle 17: Variety and Whimsy.......................................................................................................24
Principle 18: Reflection of Local Values...........................................................................................25
Principle 19: Many Choices and Many Things to Do with Sociable Settings.....................26
Context of Placemaking Principles, Linkages with Sustainability & Caveats........... .......................27

Bibliography and References............................................................................................................................31
Appendix: Comprehensive Practice Guide.................................................................................................35
Making Places Special: Professional Guide

Context for Principles • Place Identity. Place identity represents the
values and meaning we impart on a place based
on what others tell us about the place along with
These guiding principles were inspired by a book our own socialization shaped by age, class, gender,
entitled Making Places Special by former UW- ethnicity, education, etc. (Hague, 2005). Place
Extension Specialist Gene Bunnell. In addition, identities are formed through milieux of feelings,
Gene Bunnell provided the research that provides meanings, experiences, memories and actions that,
the outline for the “Characteristics of Quality while ultimately personal, are substantially filtered
Places.” Gene’s research includes the results of an through socialization. (Hague, 2005)
American Planning Association survey of planners
that identified the qualities of special places, as • Planning and Placemaking. We see community
well as a similar survey of Wisconsin planners planning as being about placemaking; that is to
conducted in 1998 and 1993, respectively. These say that a key purpose of planning is to create,
resources have been organized, adapted and built reproduce or mould the identities of places through
upon by Steve Grabow. manipulation of the activities, feelings, meanings
and fabric that combine into place identity. (Hague,
This is intended to provide a basic understanding 2005)
of key principles of community design for local
officials, technical professionals and citizen • Placemaking and Public Places. Creating a
planners involved in planning and development. vision around the places that citizens view as
important to community life and their daily
This work is now being sponsored by the UW- experience based on community needs and
Extension Downtown Vitality and Community aspirations. (Project for Public Spaces Website.)
Placemaking Team. This specific “Professional
ii
Guide” provides a research base and rationale for • Quality Urban Design and Place Identity. New
documenting the importance of each principle developments should accentuate the features
of placemaking. In addition, this resource that people inherently use to navigate their
provides “prompts” for professionals who use way through their surroundings including
an accompanying Power Point when delivering paths, nodes, landmarks, districts and edges.
these principles to aspiring “citizen planners”. (Lynch, 1960 in Hague, 2005). Practical design
(Powerpoint presentations on Principles of aims at meeting the needs of users of space
Community Placemaking are available at: including: ease of finding one’s way around,
www.uwex.edu/ces/cty/jefferson/cnred/cnred.html) connections between places, variety and interest,
robustness, interest, personalization and visual
appropriateness. (Bentley, et. al., 1985 in Hague,
Definition of Placemaking 2005)
There are several definitions and concepts related
to the notion of placemaking, place identity
and community livability. As context for this Format
presentation, a few of these ideas are explored. In this publication, the 19 principles of community
placemaking are organized into five functional
areas. The research-based justification and
• Place. A place is a geographical space that is rationale for each principle is provided. The
defined by meanings, sentiments and stories. specific scholarship is cited.
(Hague, 2005) Places are places (and not just
spaces) because they have identity. (Hague, 2005)

Principles of
Professional Guide
Functional Area I
Effective and Functional

Physical Configuration

Functional Area I: Effective and Functional Physical Configuration
Principle 1: Compact Communities and Clear Urban/Rural Differentiation
Compact development that doesn’t sprawl,

enabling urban and rural areas to be clearly
differentiated from one another.
Value and Importance Sustainability

Community builders and planners have long been Future development patterns that recognize
trying to design communities that combine the best the clear distinction between the country and
of the country and the best of the city. (Hall, 1997) the community are positioned for sustainability.
Grabow (Beatley, 2000)
Planners have sought to keep a clear visual Future development patterns that are more
distinction between town and country; the “green compact and contiguous to existing development
belt” planning concept is the most important policy make communities more sustainable. (Beatley,
for the urban fringe and to define the urban-rural 2000)
2 relationship. (Hauge, 2005)
Community Edge and Green Belts

Since Ebenezer Howard and his conceptualization
of the Garden City and Social City in the late 1800’s,
there has been recognition of the benefits of “green
belts” to define the community edge, and preserve
appropriately rural land uses. (Hall, 1997, Hague,
2005, adaptations by Grabow)
A strong model of growth contains the vision

of compact urban form while protecting the
green spaces of natural areas and working farms A clear strong edge defining city from rural shows
around the periphery of the city. (Beatley, 2000, Portland, Oregon’s growth boundary
adaptations by Grabow)
Farmland Preservation Community Preference

Farmland and nature are as important to the Portland’s growth containment policies are
metropolis as the garden is to the house. (Urban strongly supported by the public. (Beatley, 2000)
Design Associates, 2003)
Ideal City
In and near towns and villages, development can The ideal city would offer a wide range of jobs
occur in urban service areas, and the best soils can and services in a compact urban form connected
still be reserved for agricultural use. (Lewis, 1996) to other cities with effective transportation. (Hall,
1997, Beatley 2000, adaptations by Grabow)

Principle 2: Strong Urban Center
Urban places with a strong center, where multiple uses

and activities are clustered in fairly close proximity
(strong village and city centers).
Value and Importance

Every community must have a civic or community
focus that contains commercial, residential, civic
buildings and a green or commons. (Nelessen,
1995)
Strong urban centers and downtowns comprise

the “heart and soul” of the community and are
fundamental to the city’s economic health, heritage
and civic pride.
Downtown Asheville, NC offers multiple uses and 3
Community Preference activities within close proximity of each other
Given the choice between compact centers and
commercial strips, consumers favor the centers by a
wide margin. (Bohl, 2002)
Many are convinced that community gathering

places are the missing ingredients that people in
suburban areas and edge cities are looking for
today. (Bohl, 2002)
Towns and cities whose social life coalesces around

such places (cafes, taverns, squares, greens, etc.)
meet the first criteria for people looking for a good
Baltimore bustles at night with its vibrant nightlife
place to live today. (Bohl, 2002)
and many options for pedestrians
Identifiable Center
The metropolis is made of multiple centers that
are cities, towns and villages, each with its own
identifiable center and edges. (Urban Design
Associates, 2003)
Chapel Hill, NC Meadowmont city center

Principle 3: City-centered Redevelopment and Infill
City-centered redevelopment and infill.

Infill development within existing urban areas
conserves environmental resources, economic
interests and the social fabric. (Urban Design
Associates, 2003)
Infill reclaims marginal and abandoned areas.

(Urban Design Associates, 2003)
Infill riverfront condominiums in Fort Atkinson, WI
4 Community Preference
Urban villages and town centers are beginning to
appear on urban infill sites and in redevelopment
areas including brownfield sites often to serve a
nearby workforce or residences. (Bohl, 2002)
The redevelopment of shopping centers and strip

commercial areas into main streets, town centers
and urban villages has become increasingly
common.
Reuse Hard Rock Cafe at Baltimores revitalized Inner Harbor

A livable city needs diversity in design and building
types- thus the importance of preservation and
reuse not only of notable historic buildings, but of
ordinary serviceable buildings. (Barnett, 2003)
Cottage Grove now boasts a revitalized downtown

anchored by a large redevelopment project.
Principle 4: Integration of Housing and Employment
Integration of housing, employment centers and

shopping areas, so that communities contain places
to live, work and shop, and contain a full range of facilities.

Design for the human- the community must be
a place for people to live, work, play and interact.
(Nelessen, 1994)
Town center and main street projects are promoted

as “live, work, play” settings that offer relief from the
totally automobile-dependent lifestyles of “soccer
moms”, business commuters and others who feel
trapped by suburban sprawl. (Bohl, 2002) Meadowmont neighborhood in Chapel Hill, NC
offers shops and businesses with residential upstairs 5
Development should be planned for a job/housing
balance, not as bedroom suburbs. (Urban Design
Associates, 2003)
Community Preference
Survey research indicates the need for more diverse
residential, retail, hotel and office formats. (Bohl,
2002)
Mixed use environments offer an appealing

alternative for “the new economy worker” tired of This multi-use development in Chapel Hill, NC houses
the isolation in office and technology parks. (Bohl, retail on street level and residences on upper levels
2002)
Trends
Urban villages are “a blend of old-fashioned
neighborhood living and 21st century technology
and convenience.” (Bohl, 2002)
Home-based businesses are one of the fastest

growing segments of commerce and this is fueling
and interest in live/work buildings. (Bohl, 2002)
Middleton Hills, WI incorporates employment and

shopping in the center with residential nearby
Principle 5: Vital, Distinctive and Varied Neighborhoods
Vital, distinctive and varied neighborhoods in

close proximity to the urban center.

Neighborhoods near the urban center can be
appealing with their own distinctive characteristics
as well as easily accessible to the urban center by
foot, bicycle or transit. (Grabow)
A key principle of a livable community or

workplace is that it should be walkable, and these
neighborhoods near the urban center enable this Distinctive architecture is prominent in this Chapel
option. (Barnett, 2003) Hill, NC neighborhood
6
Community Preference
Polls of downtown workers show substantial
numbers of people who work downtown would
like to live downtown or near downtown. (Barnett,
2003)
Young people just starting out want to live in a

place where there is something always going on.
(Barnett, 2003)
Close to the downtown, these homes in Chapel Hill,
NC allow residents to walk to the city center
Large, turn of the century homes line a street in This neighborhood in Wauwatosa, WI with variation
Watertown in materials used to build homes
Principle 6: Avoidance of Low-density Residential Development on the Urban Fringe
Avoidance of low-density residential

development on the urban fringe.

New development contiguous to urban boundaries
should be organized as neighborhoods and
districts, and should be integrated with the existing
urban pattern. (Urban Design Associates, 2003)
European cities have demonstrated the possibility

of achieving compact urban form while protecting
the green spaces in and around the city. (Beatley,
2000)
Conceptual plans for the Countryside Farm, Jefferson 7
More Medium Density WI, with higher density residential
Public land use planning can help to counter the
forces of deconcentration at the urban fringe by
advocating for more medium density urban forms
when contiguous extensions are imminent. (Beatley
from Hall, 1995, adaptations by Grabow)
Trends
The true neighborhood pattern has been lost in
the “uniform housing tracts” that have become the
neighborhood norm on the edges and recently
annexed areas of communities. (Barnett, 2007)
Middleton Hills, WI has higher density residential City of La Crosse’s land use plan calls for dense growth
development on the fringe of the community surrounded by greenspace on the urban fringe
Principle 7: A Mix of Housing Types and Households with Different Income Levels
A mixture of housing types that meets the needs

of a variety of households with different income levels.

Communities should provide a broad spectrum
of public and private uses to support a regional
economy that benefits people of all incomes.
Affordable housing should be distributed

throughout the region to match job opportunities
and to avoid concentrations of poverty. (Urban
Single family residential and an apartment complex
8 Strengthened Civic Bonds side by side in Fort Atkinson, WI
A broad range of housing types can bring people
of diverse ages, races and incomes into daily
interaction, strengthening the personal and civic
bonds essential to an authentic community. (Urban
Ethical Pledge and Fairness

In 1949, Congress pledged a decent home and
suitable living environments for every American
Family. (Housing Act of 1949)
Improvements in the community should benefit all The Common Bond Senior Residences in Watertown,
the residents at all income levels. WI offers a senior community near traditional homes
Economic Benefits
An adequate supply of housing for the residents
who are economically well off is very much in the
community’s economic interest, in particular, given
the importance of the service sector economy.
(Bunnell, 2002, adaptations by Grabow)
A mix of land uses, housing, jobs and incomes

creates a more balanced community, reduces traffic
costs and creates better fiscal balance. (Nelessen, Co-housing at Pacifica in Carrboro, North Carolina
1994)
Principles of
Professional Guide
Functional Area II
User-Friendly and
Efficient Circulation

Functional Area II: User-Friendly and Efficient Circulation
Principle 8: Pedestrian and Bike Friendly Environments
Pedestrian friendly environments (pattern of

development that supports and encourages sidewalk
pedestrian activity and bicycle path travel).
Value and Importance Community Livability

Urban areas exist for human beings and we need One of the primary principles of a livable
to find ways to give our urban areas this human community is that is should be walkable. (Barnett,
quality or scale. (Tibbalds, 1992) 2003)
Interconnected networks of streets should be Many activities of daily living should occur within
designed to encourage walking, reduce the walking distance, allowing independence to those
number and length of automobile trips and who do not drive, especially the elderly and the
conserve energy. (Urban Design Associates, 2003) young. (Charter of the New Urbanism)
10 Walkways and Design Community leaders need to think like pedestrians,

An interlinked network of pedestrian walkways cyclists, the old, children and disabled persons, not
is a basic design feature in the creation of just like drivers. (Tibbalds, 1992, adaptations by
communities. (Nelessen, 1994) Grabow)
Design for pedestrian dimensions and distances

through compact form, layout and street
characteristics. (Nelessen, 1994)
Streets and Walkways

The streets should be both pleasant for
pedestrians as well as efficient for vehicles and
transit. (Barnett, 2003)
The sidewalks along streets remain the most

appropriate places for people to walk, and the
street should remain the primary means of
communication in cities and towns. (Barnett, Milwaukee’s lakefront is easily navigable by both
2003) bikers and pedestrians.

Functional Area II: User-Friendly and Efficient Circulation
Principle 9: High Quality and Convenient Public Transit and Transportation
High quality and convenient public transit coordinated with

land use and development, and concentrated development
along transit corridors and proximity to transit stops.
Transit Roadways
Value and Importance Value and Importance
Transit corridors, when properly planned and The street is the basic organizing feature for the
coordinated, can help organize metropolitan livable community. (Barnett, 2003, adaptations by
structure and revitalize urban centers. (Urban Grabow)
Respect for Different Modes
In contemporary communities, development must
Mixed use formats based on traditional towns
adequately accommodate automobiles, but must
and villages have been embraced, in part, for
do so in ways that respect the pedestrian and the
their potential to create desirable, high-density
form of public space. (Urban Design Associates,
residential neighborhoods clustered around transit
2003) 11
stations - an arrangement that can, in turn, reinforce
transit ridership. (Bohl, 2002) Transportation Experience
Transit and Density It is not deemed enough that a road should serve
Appropriate building densities and land uses as a means of communication from one place to
should be within walking distance of transit stops, another, it is also desired that it should afford some
permitting public transit to become a viable dignity of approach to important places, and be a
alternative to the automobile. (Urban Design pleasant way for the passer-by. (Bohl, 2002)
Associates, 2003)
Sound Circulation System Design
Community Preference The circulation system for a community should be
Transit-oriented projects are striking a responsive make up of an interconnected network of streets
chord with homebuyers, many of whom are making and walkways that form a grid, which provides
home purchases based on little more than the multiple routes for cars, bikes and pedestrians to
promise of future transit service. (Bohl, 2002) move from one block to the next. (Bohl, 2002)
The Intermodal Station in Milwaukee, WI connects A wide variety of modes of transportation allow for
travelers through bus and train transportation smooth metropolitan movement
12

Principles of
Professional Guide
13
Functional Area III
Preserved Natural and Cultural

Resources and Environment

Functional Area III: Preserved Natural and Cultural Resources and Environment
Principle 10: Environmental Resources and Parks: Preserved and Consciously Integrated
into the Fabric of the Community
Environmental resources, natural amenities, scenic qualities,

parks, recreation and open space that are preserved and are
consciously integrated into the fabric of the community.
Value and Importance Parks and Community Livability

Conservation areas and open lands should In many successful communities, parks, trails and
be used to define and connect different walkway corridors are the primary organizing
neighborhoods and districts. (Urban Design elements that shape development, create
Associates, 2003) livability, preserve property values and provide
the infrastructure to promote health and fitness.
It is important to provide regional green space (Garvin and Berens, 1997 and Grabow, 2005)
and natural lands both inside and outside of the
growth boundary, including large wedges of Not only should people live and work close to parks
green space and nature extending into the city. and open space, but they should not be too far from
14 (Beatley, 2000) areas of natural or agricultural landscape. (Barnett,
2003)
Provide for adequate internal and peripheral open
space. (Nelessen, 1994) A range of parks, from tot lots and village greens
to ball fields and community gardens, should be
Relationship Between the Community and Natural distributed within neighborhoods. (Urban Design
Resources Associates, 2003)
The metropolis has a necessary and fragile
relationship to its agrarian hinterland and natural Community Preference
landscapes; the relationship is environmental, Research shows that people have a greater sense of
economic and cultural. (Urban Design Associates, well-being if their lives include ready access to the
2003) natural environment. (Barnett, 2003)
Quality places for many include the ability to

live in a vital, urban place while still remaining in
touch with nature and being able to appreciate
scenic and environmental qualities close at hand.
(Bunnell, 2002)
The only way to preserve environmental resources

and rural areas in the long run is by confronting
development head on - by planning, building and
maintaining urban communities in which people
want to live. (Bunnell, 2002) Milwaukee’s O’Donnell Park offers visitors a green
corridor connecting downtown and Lake Michigan
Principle 11: Preserved Farmland and Related Open Space
Preserved farmland and related open space, wildlife habitats

and environmental corridors.
Value and Importance Framing the Challenge of Farmland Preservation

Farmland and nature are as important to the The challenge for rural areas is to maintain an
metropolis as the garden is to the house. (Urban economic base and agricultural production
Design Associates, 2003) while preserving and enhancing the aesthetic,
ecological and recreational resources of the area.
The Land Ethic (Lewis, 1996)
Aldo Leopold’s land ethic suggests that we must
have reverence for the land and treat it with respect. Environmental Corridors as a Preservation
(Lewis, 1996) Consideration
Identifying environmental corridors quickly leads
A land ethic reflects the existence of an ecological us to the most critical lands to preserve, providing 15
conscience, and this in turn reflects a conviction of a sound basis on which to make basic decisions
individual responsibility for the health of the land. about where to build, where not to build and how
(Lewis, 1996) to build. (Lewis, 1996)
Premier Farmland
Southern Wisconsin and Jefferson County have
been identified in a region considered as some
of the finest soils for farming in the Midwest, as
is a nationally significant area for food and fiber
production. (Lewis, 1996)
Jefferson County is part of an upper Midwest region

containing an urban ring around rich farmland (the
Circle City framework), and there are ample areas
to build without destroying key agricultural soils
or natural diversity if proper planning and regional
design process is made available to our residents.
(Lewis, 1996)
A preserved farm within the rolling countryside of
western Rock Lake, Lake Mills, WI

Principle 12: Historic and Cultural Resources Consciously Preserved and Integrated into
Contemporary Settings
Historic and cultural resources consciously preserved

and integrated into contemporary settings.

The development and redevelopment of towns
and cities should respect historical patterns,
precedents and boundaries. (Urban Design
Associates, 2003)
It is important to preserve and reuse not only

notable historic buildings and districts, but
ordinary serviceable buildings. (Barnett, 2003)
16 Preservation Ethic
A new preservation ethic has evolved which
suggests that any old building should be saved
unless there are clear economic or design reasons
why it has to make room for new development.
(Barnett, 2003)
Quality of Historic Buildings

Traditional towns, buildings and landscapes
are usually put together far better than new Milwaukee’s Historic Third Ward integrates new and
ones. They have a richness, intricacy and user- old buildings seamlessly
friendly quality that has evolved from years, even
centuries, of adaptation. (Tibbalds, 1992)
Contemporary Responses
New development should provide a
contemporary response which is subtle.
(Tibbalds, 1992)
Downtown La Crosse, WI has held onto its rich, historic

buildings with its contemporary habitants

Principles of
Professional Guide
17
Functional Area IV
Enhanced Local Identity

and Sense of Place

Functional Area IV: Enhanced Local Identity and Sense of Place
Principle 13: Strong Local Character, Community Identity and a Sense of Place
Strong local character, community identity and

a sense of place
Value and Importance People Places

Quality of life and sense of place are increased A primary task of all urban architecture and
if public and private spaces are well designed landscape design is the physical definition of streets
and reflect the character and needs of the and public spaces as places of shared use. (Urban
communities in which they occur. (Lewis, 1996) Design Associates, 2003)
Sense of place reflects our appreciation of the There must be a sufficiently dense concentration for
design elements, style, colors, textures, patterns, people, for whatever purposes they may be there.
odors and sounds of a given place. (Lewis, 1996) This includes dense concentrations in the case of
people who are there because of residence. (Jane
Stimulating Places Jacobs in Tibbalds, 1992)
18
Variety in the scale of the spaces we inhabit,
spatial diversity, stimulates our imaginations and A good environment and an attractive public realm
thus contributes to the quality of our lives. (Lewis, are not just created by professional specialists -
1996) architects, town planners, engineers, landscape
architects and so on - or even just by the patrons
Streets and squares should be safe, comfortable of those professionals. They are created and
and interesting to the pedestrian; properly maintained by the love and care of the people who
configured, they encourage walking and enable live and work in a town or city. (Tibbalds, 1992)
neighbors to know each other and to protect their
communities. (Urban Design Associates, 2003)
Harley Davidson has a strong presence in Miller Brewing Company continues the beer brewing
Milwaukee. tradition that Milwaukee is known for
Functional Area IV: Enhanced Local Identity and Sense of Place
Principle 14: Well-designed Public Buildings and Public Spaces

Enlivened by Works of Art and Sculpture
Well-designed public buildings and public spaces that

strengthen community sense of place, often reinforced
and enlivened by works of art and sculpture.
Value and Importance Art and Community Meaning

The public realm is, in my view, the most important Town master plans commonly talk about local
part of our towns and cities. The overriding criterion character or community uniqueness. People
by which cities and towns should be judged is the where they live are hungry for meaning. Now,
nature of their public realm. (Tibbalds, 1992) more than ever, [the arts and] councils can be
the stewards of meaning for their home places.
Distinctive Sites and Buildings (Maryo Gard Ewell, 2006, adaptations by Grabow)
Civic buildings and public gathering places require
important sites to reinforce community identity
and the culture of democracy. (Urban Design Art and Community Interaction
Associates, 2003) Public art functions as a conversation piece to
foster the casual human exchange that is the heart
19
Civic buildings and public gathering places deserve of the city’s purpose. (Sucher, 1995)
distinct form, because their role is different from
that of other buildings and places that constitute A piece of public art, or an artist’s skilled
the fabric of the city. (Urban Design Associates, transformation of some otherwise mundane street
2003)) furniture, gives us something to observe, ponder
and mention. (Sucher, 1995)
The Center for Art and Culture
One advantage that older city centers have over
new suburbs is a long history as a center of art and
culture. (Barnett, 2003)
As a community became more urban, its gathering

places did as well - a shift that was reflected in the
construction of buildings that further enclosed and
defined the space, and in the addition of walkways,
statues, art, monuments, lighting and more formal
landscaping in the gathering place itself. (Bohl,
2002)
Cravath Lake Park Entrance, Whitewater, WI was

designed and built locally

20

Principles of
Professional Guide
21
Functional Area V
Attributes to Instinctively
Draw Us to Places

Functional Area V: Attributes to Instinctively Draw Us to Places
Principle 15: Connectivity
Vehicular, pedestrian and transit connectivity

and ease of movement from one part of the
community to another.

Good urban areas are legible - all this really means
is in this context is that it should be easy for
people, as pedestrians or drivers, to understand
where they are, how the town is arranged and
which way to go for the different places, amenities
and facilities they require. (Tibbalds, 1992)
Corridors as Connectors
Corridors are regional connectors of
neighborhoods and districts; they range from Signage in Lake Mills, WI guides vehicular traffic and
22 boulevards and rail lines to rivers and parkways. pedestrians to destinations within the city
Street Connections
The street is the city’s major public forum and its
careful definition and design is a major element
of urban design; we need to reestablish the
importance of the street as a key component in
the urban fabric. (Tibbalds, 1992)
Transit Connections
Appropriate building densities and land uses Bike routes in Watertown, WI link to almost all areas of
should be within walking distance of transit stops, the city including the downtown
permitting public transit to become a viable
alternative to the automobile. (Urban Design
Associates, 2003)
Walking Connections
Many activities of daily living should occur within
walking distance, allowing independence to
those who do not drive especially the elderly and
young. (Urban Design Associates, 2003)
Bikes, trains, trams and buses all converge at the
Most blocks must be short; that is streets and
Heidelberg, Germany train station
opportunities to turn corners must be frequent.
(Jane Jacobs in Tibbalds, 1992)
Principle 16: Drama and Dignity: Real Places
Landmarks and building façades providing evidence

that it is a real place, not just superficial.

Interesting and memorable buildings or features
contribute to the image people form of a place
and the image that they can take away with them.
(Tibbalds, 1992)
Structure and Landmarks

Public and civic buildings should be located to
structure the town or the city center, to form
memorable parts of the center and to provide
landmarks at the end of key view corridors. The dramatic approach to Madison and the state 23
(Tibbalds, 1992) capitol building
Make the most of gateways, landmarks,

topographical variation, the nighttime appearance
and the definition of areas of different character.
(Tibbalds, 1992)
Design Vocabulary and Visual Rhythm

Buildings also do much more than house people
and shops; they establish the design vocabulary of
places and the visual rhythm of streetscapes. (Bohl,
2002)
The Washington Monument dominates the center of

this Baltimore neighborhood
Principle 17: Variety and Whimsy
Expressed in architectural forms and

design details.

Variation within the design conformity creates
the most visually positive communities.
(Nelessen,1994)
Throughout urban history, colorful, decorative,

and even fanciful architecture has given life and
visual interest to the streets of cities. (Ford, 2003)
The Milwaukee Art Museum’s Burke Brise Soleil is a
Variety and Complexity moveable, wing-like sunscreen along Lake Michigan
24 Variations on basic patterns must be encouraged
in order to prevent a same dullness. (Nelessen,
1994)
We must be careful not to make everything too

prescriptive-- too neat and tidy. Urban areas are
messy and complex, rich and muddled. (Tibbalds,
1992)
The district must mingle buildings that vary in age

and condition, including a good proportion of old
The Pineapple Fountain reflects the friendly hospitality
ones so that they vary in the economic yield that
of the people of Charleston, SC
they must produce. This mingling must be fairly
close-grained. (Jane Jacobs in Tibbalds, 1992)
An Asheville landmark, the giant iron directs visitors to

the 1926 Flat Iron Building
Principle 18: Reflection of Local Values
Reflection of local values; appropriate

architectural styles, materials and vegetation

Above all, buildings and development must be
appropriate to and unique to the particular town or
city in which they are located. (Tibbalds, 1992)
Architecture and landscape design should grow

from the local climate, topography, history and
building practice. (Urban Design Associates, 2003)
Capturing the unique sense-of-place qualities of

each landscape personality enables the designer The fieldstone wall at Riverside Park in Watertown, WI 25
to create palates to harmonize future development uses the natural, local stone
with their regional qualities. (Lewis, 1996)
New buildings must be imaginative and of high

quality and, while being firmly rooted in or
respecting their historical context, they must be
obviously of their age. (Tibbalds, 1992)
Integration with Surroundings

Individual architectural projects should be
seamlessly linked to their surroundings. (Urban
Design Associates, 2003) The Elias Inn in Watertown reflects the architecture of
the German immigrants who first settled the city
The landscaping framework can be part of the
organizational structure of the city, provided it is
well integrated with the built fabric. (Tibbalds,
1992)
Preservation and renewal of historic buildings,

districts and landscapes affirm the continuity
and evolution of urban society. (Urban Design
Associates, 2003)
Mullen’s Dairy Bar amd Eatery -woven into the very

heart of downtown Watertown
Principle 19: Many Choices and Many Things to Do with Sociable Settings
Many choices and many things to do with sociable

settings; not just consumerism and shopping; not
just a workplace or a bedroom community.
Value and Importance Sociable settings

Successful and attractive cities are characterized
by a variety and mix of uses and activities in any Value and Importance
one area. (Tibbalds, 1992) Throughout urban history, public plazas, village
greens, and town squares have been the focal
The mixing of the pubic and private, the special points of town and town centers, providing a public
and the everyday, in a natural way, has led to realm for everyday social life. (Bohl, 2002)
cities and owns which people both love and enjoy
using. (Tibbalds, 1992) There is a need to reestablish public spaces in our
towns and cities where people can “meet and talk”
Vibrant Mixed Uses and that creates a sense of place. (William Whyte in
26 Bohl, 2002)
The overall objective must be the creation of a
rich, vibrant, mixed use environment that does
not die at night or weekends and is visually A Feature in Successful Communities
stimulating and attractive to residents and visitors Many major European cities enjoy a wonderful
alike. (Tibbalds, 1992) legacy of urban parks, planted squares and tree-
lined boulevards. (Tibbalds, 1992)
Multiple Functions
One of the key features of successful town centers,
But on the whole, the majority of the uses and
past and present, is the variety of attractive public
activities that make up the town or city - housing,
gathering places they contain. (Bohl, 2002)
employment, shopping, culture, entertainment,
administration, public services and recreation-
can exist cheek by jowl and the public urban
environment will be the richer for it. (Tibbalds,
1992)
The district, and indeed as many of its internal

parts as possible, must serve more than one
primary function; preferably more than two.
These must ensure the presence of people who
go outdoors on different schedules and are in the
place for different purposes, but who are able to
use many facilities in common. (Jane Jacobs in The riverwalk connecting restaurants, shops, festivals
Tibbalds, 1992) and downtown Milwaukee, WI

Principles of
Professional Guide
27
Context of Placemaking Principles,

Linkages with Sustainability & Caveats

Context, Linkages and Caveats
Context with Other Principles Linkages with Notions of
A “Placemaking Imagery Forum” was held on Sustainability
February 1, 2006 to further describe and test the
validity of these placemaking principles (Grabow, Most conceptualizations of urban design now
et. al., 2006). This forum assembled many of the include referenced to a sustainable dimension.
most prominent community design organizations (Carmona, 2001) Some argue that planning
in Wisconsin. In the follow-up discussions from and to some extent urban design have always
this forum, it was determined that there are pursued notions of sustainability. The language
two corollary design principles that are also of sustainability has been around Europe since the
fundamental to making places special and of high 1700’s and 1800’s (Davoudi and Layard, 2001) The
quality. These Principles are: direct linkages of sustainability with planning and
placemaking can be traced to the pioneers of the
Maintenance and operation: A community must planning movement in the late 1800’s and early
have a commitment to maintaining its character 1900’s with Howard, Geddes and Unwin. (Carmona,
and quality of place. To do this, a community must 2001)
be a good land steward of peripheral open space;
must maintain the streetscape and public viewshed Many accepted frameworks for sustainable
including litter and trash pickup; must insist on development seek to reconcile the conflicts or
property maintenance for commercial, industrial balance the concerns of economic development,
and residential property; advocate for building with ecological preservation and social equity.
low maintenance materials; and must recognize the (Carmona, 2001; Godschalk, 2004; adapted by
28 importance of maintaining a sense of safety and Grabow) These frameworks of sustainability
security. (Nelessen, 1994) Relatedly, a community containing the three “E’s”: economy, environment
can make and enormous contribution to achieving and equity are further enhanced by adding
sustainability by maintaining control over a discrete another dimension called “community livability”.
number of key management variables such as (Godschalk, 2004) The reference to community
minimizing the energy, material and land use livability has gained prominence as part of urban
requirements of the community and its inhabitants. design movements committed to reestablishing
(Rees, 1999) the relationship between the art of building and
the making of community, through citizen-based
Economic Generators: A community must have participatory planning and design. (Godschalk,
a strong economic base and economic vitality to 2004) An argument can be made that the ultimate
support quality places. The synergy of the private outcome or long-term vision for a high quality of
sector in concert with the public sector drives life in the future is both sustainable and livable
community revitalization. (Smith, Kennedy, et. al. places; sustainable and livable places should reflect
1996) a balance among environmental, economic, equity
and livability values (Godschalk, 2004)
It was determined that these two corollary design
principles are actually components of or “cut across” There are many linkages between notions of
many of the identified principles. They also can sustainability and community placemaking. In
be considered as strategies or part of a pattern order to create livable communities, the focus must
of policies or actions necessary to support and be on the principles of community placemaking
implement the principles of quality places. For this (Bohl, 2002 and Grabow). In addition, there
reason, these are not included in the primary listing is extensive overlap between the desirable
of principles, but are certainly imbedded in key characteristics or criteria for sustainable cities (i.e.
concepts of placemaking. sustainable community design) and the principles
of community placemaking offered in this The fact that an assembly of some of the most
document. (Carmona, 2001, adapted by Grabow) prominent planning and design organizations
While this is a significant topic to address with in Wisconsin have corroborated these principles
limited space, it is important to provide assurance provides further support for the usefulness of this
that the principles of community placemaking suggested framework.
represent a fundamental dimension and
component of sustainable systems.
Closing Comments on Using
Caveats These Principles
Another caveat or cautionary note associated with In closing, it would be fair to ponder how
these principles is that these are a reasonable set these principles can be used to help shape our
of principles or characteristics of quality places that communities into better places. This query could in
can be aspired toward. However, no community has itself command lengthy discourse. However, a few
all of these characteristics fully in place. Even cities summary comments are in order.
recognized as the finest cities in the nation fall short
of meeting commonly accepted principles of smart The University of Wisconsin-Extension has been a
growth. (Downs, 2005) leader in developing guidebooks and assistance
in developing sound protocol for community
To fully meet all of these “ideal” characteristics development, planning and “change” processes
is a high standard to meet. In addition, some of (Grabow, Hilliker, Moskal, 2006). These guidelines
the principles are more literally applicable to the suggest the importance of designing processes that
larger or more urban communities. (Although integrate community research, community learning,
the general intent of the principles can be community visioning and comprehensive planning
considered, with some powers of abstraction to all processes (Grabow, October 2004).
sized communities). However, given the relative 29
“newness” of smart growth and new urbanist Considerable effort is now being given to the
concepts along with the lofty and ambitious nature importance of integrating the necessary education
of principles of placemaking, there are experienced about principles of placemaking with sound
planning professionals who believe that there has planning processes so that we can “gear-up”
been significant progress in moving towards sound aspiring citizen planners along with the professional
principles of development and preservation. This design and development community to make
has been characterized as a dynamic national places special. This is not an easy assignment. We
movement that has engaged the attention of will have to educate and raise the community
diverse interest groups, and the movement has capacity of literally millions of citizens to keep alive
made an appreciable difference in the last 15 years. the movement of smart growth, new urbanism,
(Costa, 2005) and quality placemaking. With this in mind, the
appendix contains a Comprehensive Practice Guide
A final caveat is in order. It is understood that summary on using these placemaking resources
there are many scholars, planners, designers and in community settings. In addition, the University
design associations that have written extensively of Wisconsin-Extension “Downtown Vitality and
on placemaking and urban design. The literature Community Placemaking Team” will continue its
has revealed both short lists and long lists of efforts to further help those interested in continuing
recommended principles. This study has concluded, this important mission toward quality placemaking.
through research and testing, that these suggested
19 principles or characteristics of quality places
represent an accurate description of a sound “slate”
of quality place characteristics.

Quotes on Planning and Placemaking
“Americans continue to yearn to live in places that are

unique and special and have a sense of place.”
Gene Bunnell, Making Places Special
It is possible to make places better, and preserve and

strengthen the qualities that make places special,
by planning.”
30 “To advance people-friendly places, we should

encourage more sensitive, friendly developments in
which color, pattern, texture and materials - as well
as technical excellence and innovation - combine to
create enjoyable places and attractive buildings.”
Francis Tibbalds, Making People-Friendly Towns
“One of the most important ingredients for successful

planning is for people to believe that planning matters
- that taking the time to think through and envision the
kind of places we want our communities to be in the
future is important, and that time spent developing
plans aimed at fulfilling our deepest
aspirations is not wasted.”

Bibliography and References
Barnett, Jonathan. Redesigning Cities: Principles, Practice and Implementation. American Planning
Association Planners Press, 2003.
Barnett, Jonathan, “Smart Growth in a Changing World”. Planning: The Magazine of the American Planning
Association, March 2007: 29.
Beatley, Timothy. Green Urbanism: Learning from European Communities. Washington D.C.: Island Press, 2000.
Bohl, Charles C. Placemaking: Developing Town Centers, Main Streets, and Urban Villages. Washington D.C.:
ULI-Urban Land Institute, 2002.
Bunnell, Gene. Making Places Special: Stories of Real Places Made Better by Planning. Chicago: American
Planning Association Planners Press, 2002.
Carmona, Matthew. “Sustainable Urban Design”. In Layard, Antonia; Davoudi, Simin and Batty, Susan
(Editors). Planning for a Sustainable Future. London, Spon Press, 2001.
Costa, Fernando. “Comment: An Ambitious Movement and its Prospects for Success.” JAPA, Journal of the
American Planning Association, Autumn, 2005: 378-380.
Davoudi, Simin and Layard, Antionia. “Sustainable Development and Planning: An Overview.” In Layard,
Antonia; Davoudi, Simin and Batty, Susan (Editors). Planning for a Sustainable Future. London: Spon
31
Press, 2001
Downs, Anthony. “Smart Growth: Why We Discuss It More Than We Do It”. JAPA, Journal of the American
Planning Association, Autumn, 2005: 367-378.
Ewell, Maryo Gard; Warlum, Michael F. The Arts in the Small Community. Washington D.C.: Americans for the
Arts, 2006.
Ford, Larry R. America’s New Downtowns: Revitalization or Reinvention? Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins
University Press, 2003.
Garvin, Alexander; Berens, Gayle. Urban Parks and Open Space. Washington D.C.: ULI-Urban Land Institute,
1997.
Girling, Cynthia L.; Helphand, Kenneth I. Yard, Street, Park. New York: John Wiley & Sons
Godschalk, David R. “Land Use Planning Challenges: Coping with Conflicts in Visions of Sustainable
Development and Livable Communities. JAPA, Journal of the American Planning Association, Winter,
2004: 5-14
Grabow, Steven H. “An Introduction to Placemaking and Making Places Special”, 2003.
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/cty/jefferson/cnred/cnred.html

Grabow, Steven H. “Overview of Plans for the Jefferson County Countryside Farm: In the Context of Quality
Place Characteristics”, 2004. http://www.uwex.edu/ces/cty/jefferson/cnred/cnred.html
Grabow, Steven H. “Exploring the Visioning Process”, Governor’s Conference on Downtown Revitalization,
October 5, 2004. http://www.uwex.edu/ces/cty/jefferson/cnred/cnred.html
Grabow, Steven H.; Hilliker, Mark; and Moskal, Joseph. Comprehensive Planning and Citizen Participation.
University of Wisconsin-Extension (G3810). Madison: Board of Regents of the University of
the University of Wisconsin, 2006.
Grabow, Steven H.; Thering, Susan; Wilson, Daniel. “Placemaking Imagery Forum”. Downtown Vitality and
Community Placemaking Team of the University of Wisconsin-Extension, February 1, 2006.
Hague, Cliff. “Identity, Sustainability and Settlement Patterns”. In Hague, Cliff and Jenkins, Paul (Editors).
Place Identity, Participation and Planning. London: Routledge, 2005.
Hall, Peter. Cities of Tomorrow. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2000.
Lewis, Jr., Philip H. Tomorrow By Design: A Regional Design Process for Sustainablity. New York: John Wiley &
Sons, 1996.

Nelessen, Anton Clarence. Visions for a New American Dream. Chicago: American Planning Association
Planners Press, 1994.
Project for Public Spaces. “Placemaking for Communities”. http://www.pps.org

32
Rees, William. “Scale, Complexity and the Conundrum of Sustainability”. In Kenny, Michael and
Meadowcraft, James., Editors. Planning Sustainability. London: Routledge, 1999.
Sucher, David. City Comforts: How to Build an Urban Village. Seattle: City Comforts Press, 1995.
Smith, Kennedy; Joncas, Kate; Parish, Bill. Revitalizing Downtowns: The Professional’s Guide to the Main Street
Approach. Washington D.C.: National Main Street Center, National Trust for Historic Preservation,
1996.
Tibbalds, Francis. Making People-Friendly Towns. London: Spon Press, 1992.
Urban Design Associates; Ray Gindroz, Principal Author. Urban Design Handbook. New York: W.W. Norton &
Company, 2003.

Project Contributors and Resources
The “Placemaking Imagery Forum” conducted in 2006, included presentations by five prominent community
design firms from Wisconsin. Each organization prepared a graphic and image-oriented presentation in an
effort to depict 19 principles of quality placemaking developed by Steve Grabow. The organizations and
their lead presenters included:
Planning and Design Institute, Milwaukee. Larry Witzling. www.pdisite.com
Schreiber/Anderson Associates, Madison. Gil Jevne and Jon Hoffman. www.saa-madison.com
Ken Saiki Design, Madison. Ken Saiki. www.ksd-la.com
Vierbicher and Associates, Madison. Gary Becker and David Marquardt. www.vierbicher.com
City of La Crosse Planning Department. Larry Kirch. www.cityoflacrosse.org/index.asp?nid=17
Another prominent community design firm who has reviewed and commented on the 19 principles
includes:
Vandewalle and Associates, Mike Slavney. www.vandewalle.com
University of Wisconsin Extension Downtown Vitality and Community Placemaking Team;

Graphic Imagery Work Group: 33
Steve Grabow, Sue Thering & Dan Wilson
Photographic & Graphic Support:

Rebecca Mehringer, Downtown Vitality and Community Placemaking Project Assistant
[email protected]
Margaret Burlingham, LanDesign by Margaret Burlingham

[email protected]
Administrative Support:
Linda Woolridge, UW-Extension Administrative Secretary
Author:
Steve Grabow, Professor
Community Development Educator
Jefferson County Office
864 Collins Road, Jefferson, WI 53549
Contact Information:
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (920) 674-7295
Website: www.uwex.edu/ces/cty/jefferson May 1, 2009

34

Principles of
Professional Guide
35
Appendix:
Comprehensive Practice Guide

officials, designers and aspiring citizen planners so
Appendix that the accepted principles of quality placemaking
or the “characteristics of quality places” can be
University of Wisconsin-Extension incorporated into local planning and revitalization
Downtown Vitality and Community Placemaking Team efforts. Former UW Extension Specialist Gene
Comprehensive Practice Guide Bunnell has written a highly successful book
Principles of Community Placemaking entitled Making Places Special: Stories of Real Places
Made Better by Planning. This book identified
research from a survey of members of the American
Appendix-Content Planning Association that identified the qualities
of special places. Inspired by this resource, UW
This Comprehensive Practice Guide provides a
Extension Community Development Educator and
summary of the resources associated with the
Professor Steve Grabow developed a curriculum and
Principles of Community Placemaking. It also provides
educational resources illustrating 19 principles of
some initial guidance for using these principles in
community placemaking. A “Placemaking Imagery
community development practice. As indicated,
Forum” was sponsored by the Downtown Vitality
additional insights into the application of these
and Community Placemaking Team. This forum
principles can be obtained by directly contacting
assembled many of the most prominent community
the author. The sections of the practice guide are as
design organization in Wisconsin to further describe
follows:
and test the validity and usefulness of these
principles. The project has evolved into a series of
• Background
graphic-oriented presentations and research on
• Purpose
these principles. The project is still underway and
• Access to this Resource
additional refinement can be expected.
• Summary of How the Resource is Used
36 • Status of Product or Output
Zweck:
The four versions of the PowerPoint on Principles of
Community Placemaking as well as the Professional These resources are intended to provide a basic
Guide document are available at: understanding of key principles of community
design for local officials, technical professionals and
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/cty/jefferson/cnred/cnred. aspiring citizen planners involved with community
html planning, visioning and community revitalization.
Background: Access to this Resource:

The University of Wisconsin-Extension (UWEX)
The resources are available from Steve Grabow at
provides extensive educational support in
this time. There is no formal distribution system
processes associated with comprehensive planning,
in place for others to use this resource since the
community planning, community visioning and
project is still underway. Currently, four different
downtown design. Process guideline publications
PowerPoint presentations summarizing the 19
are available from UWEX and other sources.
principles are on Steve Grabow’s UWEX web
Community and downtown design resources
page (see next section for URL site). In addition, a
are becoming more in demand with concepts
Professional Guide providing the research base and
of new urbanism, traditional neighborhood
rationale has been developed.
design, sustainable development and community
placemaking emerging over the past 15 years. It
has become apparent to some professionals that is
important to provide additional assistance to local

Appendix community planning groups and formal planning
bodies about to begin or already involved with
community visioning and comprehensive planning.
Downtown Vitality and Community Placemaking Team The four versions of the PowerPoint on Principles of
Comprehensive Practice Guide Community Placemaking as well as the Professional
Principles of Community Placemaking Guide document are available at:
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/cty/jefferson/cnred/cnred.
Summary of How the Resource is htm
Used:
In summary, these resources have been widely used
and distributed in Jefferson County and with UWEX
PowerPoint Presentation
colleagues. (Downtown/Main Street Groups-2,
Towns-5, Villages-1, Cities-5, County-1, UWEX
The four PowerPoint slide show presentations
Colleagues-Southern District CNRED, Eastern District
include the 19 placemaking principles organized
CNRED, Land Use Team.)
over 5 functional components or themes areas.
Each principle also contains graphic images
intended to visually prompt a better understanding Status of Product or Output:
of the principle.
The project is still underway and is being
This presentation has been given many times continuously enhanced. The descriptions provided
in Jefferson County. It has been given to several are as of the date shown below.
downtown organizations to launch planning efforts.
It has been used to inform community groups and Prepared By: Steve Grabow, Professor and 37
planning commissions about to begin a planning or Community Development Educator, University of
visioning initiative. It has served as a way to “inform Wisconsin-Extension, Jefferson County Office, May
and inspire the vision” with a high standard of what 1, 2009.
a community or place could be. It has been adapted
as a “worksheet and prompt sheet” for a community
tour. It has been used as a tool to help assess the
quality of “community visioning work” (i.e. the
initial community vision was compared to the “19
principles” to evaluate the extent to which a quality
vision has been reached).
Professional Guide: Presentation Prompts and

Rationale
This 40 page document provides research-

based rationale for each of the 19 principles.
Approximately 5 to 10 message points are provided
for each principle which further justifies the
importance of each of these as a characteristic of a
quality or special place. These message points also
help in a deeper understanding and verification of
why the principle is important. This document has
been used as an educational foundation for

Principles of Placemaking Guide

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Principles of Placemaking Guide

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Principles of

Professor and Community Development Educator

Special mention for inspiring this work is given

The author also extends special thanks to

Principles of Community Placemaking &

Functional Area II: User-Friendly and Efficient Circulation......................................................................9

Functional Area IV: Enhanced Local Identity and Sense of Place........................................................17

Functional Area V: Attributes to Instinctively Draw Us to Places........................................................21

Context of Placemaking Principles, Linkages with Sustainability & Caveats........... .......................27

Making Places Special: Professional Guide

Principles of Community Placemaking &

Effective and Functional

Making Places Special: Professional Guide

Principle 1: Compact Communities and Clear Urban/Rural Differentiation

Compact development that doesn’t sprawl,

Value and Importance Sustainability

Community Edge and Green Belts

A strong model of growth contains the vision

Farmland Preservation Community Preference

Principles of Community Placemaking &

Principle 2: Strong Urban Center

Urban places with a strong center, where multiple uses

Value and Importance

Strong urban centers and downtowns comprise

Many are convinced that community gathering

Towns and cities whose social life coalesces around

Chapel Hill, NC Meadowmont city center

Principle 3: City-centered Redevelopment and Infill

City-centered redevelopment and infill.

Value and Importance

Infill reclaims marginal and abandoned areas.

The redevelopment of shopping centers and strip

Reuse Hard Rock Cafe at Baltimores revitalized Inner Harbor

Cottage Grove now boasts a revitalized downtown

Principle 4: Integration of Housing and Employment

Integration of housing, employment centers and

Value and Importance

Town center and main street projects are promoted

Mixed use environments offer an appealing

Home-based businesses are one of the fastest

Middleton Hills, WI incorporates employment and

Principle 5: Vital, Distinctive and Varied Neighborhoods

Vital, distinctive and varied neighborhoods in

Value and Importance

A key principle of a livable community or

Young people just starting out want to live in a

Principle 6: Avoidance of Low-density Residential Development on the Urban Fringe

Avoidance of low-density residential

Value and Importance

European cities have demonstrated the possibility

A mixture of housing types that meets the needs

Value and Importance

Affordable housing should be distributed

Ethical Pledge and Fairness

A mix of land uses, housing, jobs and incomes

Making Places Special: Professional Guide

Principle 8: Pedestrian and Bike Friendly Environments

Pedestrian friendly environments (pattern of

Value and Importance Community Livability

10 Walkways and Design Community leaders need to think like pedestrians,

Design for pedestrian dimensions and distances

Streets and Walkways

The sidewalks along streets remain the most