30casestudy.pdf

A

Case Study

in

the

Use

of

Photo

Simulation

in

Local

Planning

Abstract

The

Town

of

Cary employed

photographic simulations inJour separate comprehensive planning

projects during theperiod 2000-2003. Thejourprojects covered a range

of

downtown, suburban

.

and

ruralplanning environments within

Cary

's planningjurisdiction,

making Cary

's experience

applicable to most types oflocaljurisdictions. This

paper

describes

how

photographic simulation

was

used in three

of

these planning projects,

and

evaluates the effectiveness, tips,

and

lessons

learned for each project.

Scott F.

Ramage,

AlCPand

Michael

V.

Holmes

Introduction

Photographic simulation is the practice of

takinga photograph of anexisting urbanorrural

scene, and then digitally altering it to create a

photo-realistic imagedepictingaproposedchange

to thatenvironment. Forexample, photosimulation

can beusedto

show

how

a

downtown

streetmight

look ifa proposed buildingwere built or if

new

street trees were planted.

The

useof photosimulation withintheplanning profession is gaininggroundas a powerfulaidto local planning.

Photo

simulation has

been

employed

by communities in North Carolina as

diverse as

New

Bern, Raleigh, Smithfield, and

Cary, as well as

by

the Triangle J Council of

Governments

and

campus

planners at

NC

State University.

In the practice of comprehensive planning,

photo simulations can be used to: (1 ) increase

public understanding of a

proposed

plan or

ordinance;

(2)

engage

the public

and

get constructive feedback on draft plan concepts or

recommendations;

(3)

achieve

community

consensus on the desired future; (4)demonstrate

or evaluate the feasibility of

proposed

plan

recommendations;

or (5) evaluate

competing

alternatives.

A

givensetofphoto simulations

may

serve multiple purposes during the course of a

project,dependingonthe projectphaseorthenature

ofthe target audience (e.g., the public, property

owners,land developers, publicofficials,etc.).

The

followingsectionsdescribeCary's useof photosimulation indeveloping: (1)a masterplan

for the

downtown

area, (2) a master plan and

special zoningdistrictforredevelopmentalonga

suburbanthoroughfare,and(3)Cary's

Open

Space

and Historic Resources Plan. For each project,

two

or three ofthe photo simulationsdeveloped

for the project are

shown

and

discussed as

representativeexamples ofthevariedpurposesto

whichphotosimulation

may

be appliedtoplanning

practice.

The

photo simulations for all three of

these projects

were

developed by the

Design

Research Laboratory

(DRL)

in the College of

Scott F.

Ramage

is a Senoir

Planner

with the

Town

of

Cary.

NC

and Michael

Holmes

is

Assistant Professor of

Landscape

Architecture

at

Oklahoma

State Universitv.

Design at

NCSU.

under contract to the

Town

of

Cary.

Case

1:

Redevelopment and

Infill with

Cary's

Downtown

Area

Plan

Project

Background

Development

ofCary's master plan for its

downtown

area occurred in 1999-2001. It

was

Cary's first planning project to

employ

photo

simulation.

One

ofthe principalgoalsoftheplan

is to encourage higher densities of mixed-use

development and redevelopmentwithinthe"heart ofthe

downtown"

-

an area of about four-to-five

square blocks within roughlya quartermilewalking distanceofaplannedregionalrailtransitstation

-while still maintaining the

downtown's

historic

"small

town"

charm

andcharacter.

The

plan

was

developedwiththeadviceandconsentofa

twelve-member

CitizenAdvisory Committee, appointed

by the

Town

Council.

Midway

through the project, inearly2000,it

was

decidedtoincorporatephoto simulationsinto

theplanning processinorderto:(a)help the Citizen

Advisory

Committee

understandandenvisionthe

draftlanduseand urbandesignrecommendations

that

were

emerging, so that staff could verify

whetherthere

was

consensus on the plan vision;

(b) help the advisory committee

come

toclosure

ontheirlanduserecommendations foracoupleof

downtown

areas

where

they were torn between

two

or

more

competingalternatives;and(c) help

theadvisorycommittee

come

toclosureastothe

preferred residential densities for several

downtown

areas

where

arange ofdensities were

underconsideration.

It also

was

anticipated that the

photo

simulations could serve the larger purpose of

communicating

the draft plan to the public, the

Town

Council, and the Planning Board, to help achieveoverallcommunity-wideunderstanding of

and consensus onthe

downtown

vision.

Bearing in

mind

the goals and purposes for

usingphoto simulationsin this project.

DRL

and

planningstaffselected eight

downtown

locations

for photo simulations,

and

made

preliminary

assessments of

the preferred

photographic

viewpoint foreach location.

Numerous

ground-level

and

aerial

photographs

(taken

from

a

chartered low-flyingaircraft)

were

taken ofeach

location, and from these the

DRL

and planning

staff selected the photographs to be used in the

simulations.

DRL

and

town

staffthen identified

theparametersandcharacteristicsofthe changes

to the built environment that

would

be

shown

in

eachsimulation. Three ofthe photo simulations

used in the project are described below, each

representinga differentaspectoftheuseof photo

simulationinsucha project.

Photo

Simulation

1:

"Main

Street"

Redevelopment

Figure 1

A

isawestward-looking photograph

ofexisting conditionsonE.

Chatham

Street,which

isthedowntown's "mainstreet." Figure 1

B

shows

aphotosimulationofthe street afterredevelopment

consistentwiththeplan'srecommendations. This

simulation

was

usedtoconfirmand getfeedback onthedraftlanduseanddesignrecommendations for the

commercial

district.

A

ground-level

photograph

was

used,tohelp placethe viewerin

the street from the familiar point of

view

of a

motorist travelingthroughthe

downtown.

Multiple

elements

were

tested in this simulation: the

overhead utility lines

were removed

and buried;

brick sidewalks were added; underdeveloped or

vacantlotswereredeveloped withbuildingsbrought

to the sidewalk;

ornamental

light poles

and

streetlightswereadded; and

new

streettrees and

landscapingwere added.

This simulation garnered extremely positive

feedbackfromtheadvisorycommittee,the public, and

Town

officials.

The

Town

staff

was

able to

confirmthatthecommittee liked the"buildtothe

street"designrecommendations ofthe draft plan;

thattwotothree-storybuildings

were

acceptable

tothe

community

(therehad beenresistance);that

the draftplan

recommended

an appropriatelevel

ofdensity;thatmixed-usebuildingshaving

ground-levelretail and second and third floorhousingor

officesweredesired; that thepublic realm ofthe

streetscape(sidewalks,trees, lights, utilitypoles,

etc.)has an

enormous

effectonthe desirabilityof

the vision;andthatthe

community was

willingto

take bold

moves

to achieve the vision. This

simulationachievedvirtuallyunanimousbuy-inon

-_^x

1

•^-"Ji

'.•"*rlm

1.

.

^^

-

"*^1

•fBIW^

_**«»

i

^Jmiw

^A\^'Lt

.'

j^

:

a:~°

A^

IB

£—

— —-!» _^|

^^^1^

Bk^

p""" _^*%«

•

Figure 1.4: LookingwestonEastChathamStreet-existingconditions

Figure IB: Photosimulationofthe street afterredevelopment

Photo

Simulation 2:

Downtown

Park

vs.

Infill

Housing

Figure

2A

isanorthward-looking photograph ofexistingconditionsinasquareblockinthemiddle

ofthe

downtown,

north of WalnutSt.,betweenS.

Academy

St. tothe west and S. Walker St. tothe

east. There is a large undeveloped area in the

center ofthe photograph,

where

the advisory

committee debated

between

a

recommendation

forinfillhousingor a future

downtown

park. Photo

simulationswerepreparedto helpthecommittee

decidebetweenthetwouses.

An

aerialphotograph

was

usedsince itallowedustocapturethe entire

14-acre areaanditscontextina singlephoto,which alsoenablestheviewertoconsiderthe relationship

ofthe site to Cary Elementary and the Cultural

ArtsCenter, locatedinthelowerleftofthephoto.

Figure

2B

shows

a photo simulation of

how

theareamight look ifdeveloped asa public park (with88surfaceparking spaces forjointusewith

the CulturalArts Center). Figure

2C

shows

how

the area mightlook ifdeveloped instead with 66

multifamilyunits(plus50satelliteparking spaces

for theCulturalArts Center). Both the park and

the infill housing simulations

were

based

on

conceptualsiteplansdeveloped by

DRL.

These

simulations

enabled

the advisory

committee to settlequicklyon a

recommendation

for a park at this location, rather than additional

downtown

housing.

The

simulations also were

shown

to the

community

later in the year, and

achievedthe

same

near-unanimousbuy-in forthe

park

recommendation.

The

Town

has

subsequentlydoneadetaileddesign study forthe

park,

and Cary

is currently in the process of

acquiringtheparkland.

Photo

Simulation3: Alternative Residential

Densities

and

Design

Figure

3A

is a northwestward-looking aerial

photographofexistingconditionsinand aroundan

8-acre infill

and

redevelopment

area in the

downtown.

The

areaislocatedimmediatelynorth oftheNorfolk-Southern Railroadcorridor(running

*/^^^^X"

Figure2B: Photosimulation of

how

theareamight lookifdevelopedasapublicpark

Figure 2C: Photosimulation of

how

thearea mightlookifdeveloedwith 66multifamily units

from the middle left to lowerrightofthe photo),

and immediately west of N. Harrison Avenue, a

major north-south thoroughfare that bisects the

downtown.

The

future

downtown

Cary regional

rail transitstation will be located immediatelyto

the castof N. HarrisonAvenue,justoffthe lower

right ofthe photograph. Forthe eightacre infill

areain thecenterofthephotograph, theadvisory

committee debated between different types and

densitiesofinfillhousing. Photo simulationswere

prepared to help the

committee

decide

on

a

preferredresidential density.

An

aerialphotograph

was

usedsinceit enabled usto capture the entire

areaand its contextinasingle photo.

Figure

3B

is a photo simulation of

how

the areamightlookifdeveloped with about48

medium-density

town

homes. Figure

3C

shows

the

same

area developed with 288 garden apartments or

condominiums,utilizingamixofsurfaceand

under-unitparking. Figure

3D

showstheareadeveloped

with307high-densitycondominiumunits,butusing

fewerandtaller buildings thanin Figure 3C, and

making

greater use of under-building parking, allowing the inclusion ofa private pocket park

between

the buildings.

Once

again, all three simulations were based on conceptual site plans

developedby

DRL.

These simulations generated a great deal of

debateanddiscussion astothepreferredresidential density and types of buildings, not only by the

advisory committee, but also later by the public, thePlanningBoard,and

Town

Council

members.

Ingeneral, mostadvisory committee foundallof

the simulated densities acceptable, but preferred

thehigherdensities

shown

ineitherFigures

3C

or

3D. Reaction fromthe general public

was mixed

when

they viewed the images at an open house

some

monthslater,althoughcitizens

who

livedin

the nearby neighborhoods preferred the lower

densitiesof Figure

3B

and the suburban-looking

buildingsof Figure

3C

overthe

more

urban-looking

buildings

shown

inFigure3D.

A

number

of

Town

Council

members

feltstronglythattheurbanstyle

ofFigure

3D

represented the kind of

downtown

urbanenvironmenttheydesired.

The

finaladopted

plan encourages the higher densities

shown

in

Figures

3C

or3D, and not the

medium

densities

shown

in Figure3B.

The

plandoesnot

Figure3A: Northwestward-lookingaerialphotograph ofexisting conditions in and aroundan 8-acreinfill

•

Figure 3B: Photosimulationof

how

thearea mightlook ifdevelopedwith about 48 medium-density town

homes.

Figure 3C: Area developedwith 288 garden apartments orcondos

Figure3D: Areadevelopedwith 307high-densitycondominium units

specify a specifictype ofbuilding or sitedesign,

thereby allowing designssuchasthose

shown

in

eitherFigure

3C

orFigure3D. inadditiontoother

creativedesigns.

Case

2:

Redevelopment

along

a Residential

Thoroughfare

Project

Background

Around

1990. one ofCary'sprincipal streets.

WalnutStreet,

was

widened froma three-laneroad

toafive-laneboulevard alongamile-longsection

that runs from a regional shopping mall (Cary TovvneCenter) inthewesttoan interchange with

US

Hwy.

1/64intheeast. This sectionofWalnut

Streetislinedwith 1960"ssuburbansingle-family

homes

fronting thestreet,withlotsranginginsize

from quarter-acreto aboutone acre.

By

the late

1990"s there

were

steady complaints from the

homeowners

on Walnut Street that their

homes

had

become

unlivable due to the widening and

increasedtrafficimpacts. Individual

homeowners

began to press forcommercial rezonings so they

couldselltheirlotsfornonresidentialuses,enabling

them

to

move.

This pressure intensifiedin 2000.

after the adoption

of

a

new

Comprehensive

Transportation Plan that indicated Walnut Street

would

eventuallyneedtobe

widened

again,tosix

lanes withaplantedmedian.

Inresponse,the

Town

adopteda special land

use plan for the corridor in 1998.

The

plan

recommended

that individual

home

lots fronting

Walnut Streetbe allowedtoconvert or redevelop

to office, institutional, or very

low

intensity

commercial uses, subject to specific guidelines.

More

intenseredevelopment

would

be allowedat

eitherendofthemile-longcorridor,andlessintense

redevelopment

-

using residcntially-compatible

scale and architecture

- would

occur along the

middle ofthecorridor.

Then, in late 2001. staffbegan development

ofa special corridorzoningdistrict to implement

the

recommendations

ofthe 1998 Plan, and to

amend

andrefinethe 1998 Plan asneeded.

From

200

1-2002,staff

worked

closelywiththe affected

property

owners and

adjacent residents

and

neighborhoodstodevelop thezoningdistrict and

refine the plan, holdinga series ofneighborhood

meetings with each of three separate affected

In the earliest stages ofthis effort, in early

2002,staffrealizedthattheuseofphotosimulations

would

beextremelyvaluable inorderto: (a)help

citizensunderstandand envisionthe draft zoning

district

and

plan

amendments:

(b) facilitate

community

feedbackonthedraftplananddistrict,

toguide refinementstotherecommendations; and

(c) help reach consensus between the affected property owners, adjacent neighborhoods, and

publicofficialsona unified visionforthecorridor.

DRL

and planning

staff selected three

locations along

Walnut

Street for ground-level

photo simulations, plus one perspective aerial

photograph of the corridor. After taking and

selecting the bestphotographofeachofthesesites,

DRL

and

planning

staff

developed

the

specifications

and

characteristics

of

the

redevelopment

that

would

be

shown

in each

simulation. For these simulations,

DRL

first

createdconceptualsiteplansfortheredevelopment

areas

shown

inthephotographs, inordertoguide

the creation of the photo simulations.

The

site

planswere based on therequirementsofthedraft corridor district, in order to ensure that the final simulationsrepresented feasiblescenarios.

Two

ofthephotosimulationsusedintheproject

arc described next.

Photo Simulation

4:

Redevelopment

of

Residential Lots

on

a

Widened Thoroughfare

Figure

4A

isaphotographofexistingconditions

forseveral

home

lotson thenorth sideof Walnut

Street,atthewesternendofthemile-longcorridor,

just a block east of

Cary

Townc

Center Mall.

Figure

4B

shows

a photo simulation of the lots

redeveloped according tothe draft ordinance.

A

ground-level photograph

was

used, since

most

citizensexperiencethecorridorfromthe

point-of-viewofamotoristorpedestrian. Multipleelements

were

tested in this simulation: Walnut St.

was

widened

fromafour-laneroad with acenter

two-way

turn lanetoa six-laneboulevard with an

18-footlandscapedmedian.

The

existing

homes

were

removed

and replaced with two-story office buildingsof about 5.000-10,000 squarefeet each,

withbuildingsbroughtuptothestreetandparking

placedtothesidesorrear.

Driveway

accesspoints

ontoWalnut St.wereconsolidated. Finally,street

trees and median landscaping wereadded.

This simulation garnered quite positive

feedback from the community.

The owners

of

thedepicted lots

were

satisfied withthe potential

they

saw

for their properties, although

some

of

them

wished

that the ordinance

allowed

for

commercial uses as well as office.

Community

residentsfeltthedepictedbuildingswere ofascale anddesignthatfitinwellalongtheboulevard,and

did not result in a "strip development" feel.

Wc

werealsoabletoconfirm thatthe

community

and

Figure4A is aphotograph ofexistingconditionsforseveral

home

lots on thenorth sideofWalnutSt., at the

western end ofthemile-longcorridor,justa blockeast ofCary Towne CenterMall.

Figure

4B

showsaphotosimulationofthelotsredeveloped according to the draftordinance.

public officials liked the "build to the street"

recommendations

of the draft ordinance, the

consolidation ofthe driveway access points, the location of parkingtothe rearofthesites,andthe

inclusion of a planted

median

with the next widening of WalnutStreet.

Photo

Simulation

5:

Cumulative

Redevelopment of

ResidentialLots

on

a

Widened

Thoroughfare

Figure5

A

isan aerialphotograph ofexisting

conditions along a half-mile section of

Walnut

Street,lookingwestwardstoa shoppingcenterin

the distance on the south side ofWalnut Street, immediatelyacrossfromCary

Towne

Center Mall,

which

isoff-photototheupperright.

Figure

5B

shows

a photo simulation ofthe

corridorredeveloped accordingtothedraftzoning

district.

An

aerial photograph

was

used in order

to: (a)

show

the cumulative effects ofcorridor

redevelopment alongthelength of Walnut Street

(which is notfeasible

when

usinga ground-level

image), (b) provide an

image

that includes the

neighborhoods located immediately behind the

redeveloped Walnut Street lots,and (c)

show

the

rear-yardelementsoftheredevelopedWalnut St.

lots, such as parking lots situated behind the

buildingsandrear-yard buffersnexttotheadjacent neighborhoods.

The

simulation also

shows

the impact of

eventuallywideningWalnutSt. tosixlaneswitha

planted median, and of consolidating driveway

access points. Figure

5B

also depicts the less

intense

and

more

rcsidcntially-compatible

redevelopment that the 1998 Plan

recommended

forthemiddlesectionoftheboulevard, seeninthe

center ofthe photo.

The more

intense type of

redevelopment

recommended

forthe ends ofthe

corridor

-

asdepicted in Figure

4B

-

canbeseen

atthewestern end of Walnut Street., in the upper

halfofthephoto.

This simulationprovedtobevery valuablein helpingcitizens andpublic officials"see the big picture" asto

how

redevelopmentcould

actually-work

along this corridor,

and

it

was

key

in

answeringquestionsaboutthe locationofparking

and

impacts on adjacent neighborhoods. For

residents intheadjacent neighborhoods,the

rear-yard parking

shown

in the photo-generated

community

debateaboutthedesiredtypeof rear-yard buffer orseparation, andresulted in specific

landscaping and fencing requirements. Forthe WalnutStreetlotowners andinterested developers. thesimulation helped demonstratethatreasonable

office products could be built along the corridor

undertheproposeddistrictguidelines.

Case

3:

Rural

&

Historic

Environments:

Figure5.4: Aerialphotograph ofexisting

conditionsalonga half-mile.section of Walnut Street

Figure 5B: Photosimulationofthecorridor looks

redevelopedaccording to the draftzoning district.

Project

Background

In2000-2001,planningstaffdeveloped Cary's

Open

Space

and

Historic

Resources Plan

(OSHRP),

amaster plan fortheprotectionof key

natural resources,open spaces,andhistoricareas

withinthe planningjurisdiction,as partofCary's

smart growth initiatives.

The

plan includes an inventory and

map

ofthe most important open

space

and

historic resource areas

where

preservation efforts should be focused.

The

plan

also includes specific

recommendations

for

regulatoryandpolicyapproachesthatcanbeused to preserve open space and historic areas.

Duringtheearlystagesofplandevelopment,

it

became

apparent that cluster or conservation subdivision design

would

likely be one of the

foremosttoolsforopen spacepreservation. Staff

realized, however, that

some

rural landowners

would

have difficulty in understanding cluster

design or

how

it could be applied to familiar

parcels in their

own

community. It

was

decided.

therefore, to use

photo

simulations to help

illustratefor rurallandowners, othercitizens,and

public officials,

how

cluster subdivision design could be used to protect open space areas, using

local rural sites asexamples.

DRL

andplanning

staffselected threewell-knownrurallocations for

perspective aerial photographic simulations of

conventionalvs.clustersubdivisiondevelopment.

One

ofthesethreephotosimulationsisdescribed

below

as PhotoSimulation 6.

Another challenge facing the planning team

concerned

the

recommendations

for the

two

National RegisterHistoric Districtslocated inthe

rural extraterritorialjurisdiction. Bothdistrictsarc

examples

of

small, carly-20"1

century rural

crossroadscommunities.

A

photosimulation

was

used

to

convey

to the

community

the

recommendations

and

opportunities for contcxtually sensitive infill

development

and

redevelopmentwithin thehistoric districts.

DRL

and planning staffselected a location within the

heart ofthe Carpenter Historic District for this

photo simulation, which is described

below

as

Simulation 7.

Photo

Simulation

6:

Cluster

vs.

Conventional Subdivision Design

Figure

6A

isanorthward-looking perspective aerial photograph of existing conditions in the

Carpenter Area, a rural part of Cary's

extra-territorialjurisdiction (about two miles south of

Research

Triangle Park) that includes the

Carpenter Historic District.

The

historic central

crossroads ofthe Carpenter Historic District is

locatedjust left-of-centerin thephotograph.

On

theleftsideofthephoto,a

CSX

Railroadlinecan beseen runningfromthetoptothebottom ofthe

photo.

An

aerial photograph

was

used since it

enabledustocapturetheentireareaanditscontext ina singlephoto.

Figure

6B

shows

aphoto simulation of

how

a

farm located in the lower right quadrant of the

photo mightlookifdevelopedusingconventional

subdivision design, with the entire site

-

except

for regulatory stream buffers

-

built out with

single-family

homes

on 12,000 square foot lots.

Figure

6C

shows

the

same

farmdevelopedwitha

cluster subdivision design that achieves

40%

of

thesite inopenspacewhilestillattaining the

same

number

ofdwellingsasinFigure 6B. Thisisdone

by altering thehousingstock toinclude a

mix

of

smaller-lot single-family detached housing (on

8,000 square footlots)andsingle-family attached

housing(townhomes,duplexes,triplexes).

These imageswereinitiallyusedat

community

meetings designed to get public feedback on the

draft

Open

Space

&

Historic ResourcesPlan. At

those meetings,thesimulationsfullyachievedthe

goalof conveyingclustersubdivision conceptsto

the

community

andlandowners,greatlyincreasing

public understanding. For

many

citizens. Figure

6B made

clear the degreeto

which

conventional subdivisiondevelopment mightencroachupon and

threaten thehistoric ruralcontextoftheCarpenter

Historic District.

However, most

citizens at the

community

meetings indicated that while they

wanted the preserved

open

spaces

shown

in the

clustersimulationofFigure6C,theyalsowanted

the larger-lot

housing of

the

conventional

Figure 6A:Aerialphotograph ofexistingconditions intheCarpenterArea, a ruralpart ofCan's

ETJ

Figure6B: Photosimulation of

how

afarmlocatedin thelowerrightquadrant ofthephoto mightlook if

developed using conventional subdivision design.

Figure 6C:

Farm

developedwith a clustersubdivision design.

Figure 7A: 3'60-degree

panorama

ofexistingconditions atthe historiccrossroads -Carpenter

Historic-District.

Figure 7B: Photosimulation of

how

thearea could be redevelopedina contextually-sensitiveand compatible manner.

subdivision of Figure 6B. That is, the public

wanted topreserveopen space, but did not want

tohave smallerlotsor attached housing in order toget it. Thus,there

was mixed

public buy-into the use of cluster subdivisions as a tool for preservingopenspace.

Photo

Simulation 7: ContextuallySensitive

Infill

Development

in a

Rural

Historic District

Figure

7A

is a

360-degrce

panorama

of

existingconditionsatthehistoriccrossroadsinthe

heart ofthe Carpenter Historic District,

where

thereisaclusterofhistoricstructures,includinga

general store, a farm supply store, a storage

building, and a former antique store. Figure

7B

shows

a photo simulation of

how

the area could

be redeveloped in a contextually sensitive and

compatible manner.

The

elements tested in the imageinclude the additionofsidewalks,aplanted

traffic island, street trees, landscaping, facade

renovationstoanexistingbuilding,andtheaddition ofaninfillrestaurantbuildingwithoutdoorseating. This simulation receiveduniversally positive

publicsupportatthe

community

meetingsheldto

gain feedback on the draft plan, as well as in

meetings withpublicofficials.

Tips

and

Guidelines

for

using

Photo

Simulations in Local Planning

The

tips and guidelines presented

below

are

based not only

on

the experience of Cary's

planning staff, but also on the broad experience gained by the staffof

NCSU's

Design Research

Laboratory doing photo simulation

work

for

numerous

communitiesinNorthCarolina.

A.

Develop

specific

parameters

for

each

simulation.

Attheoutsetof

work

ona simulation, carefully

identify the characteristics or parameters ofthe

changestotheenvironment thatwill be

shown

in

the photographic simulation. For example, ifa

simulated buildingistobeaddedtoaphotograph, determineinadvancethe specifictypeofbuilding

thatisdesired,including itssize andarchitectural

style,andthedesiredplacementandorientationof

thebuildingwithinthephotograph. Trytoidentify

all oftheperipheral elements that arc desired in

thesimulation,which

may

includeaddingpeople,

B.

Develop

a site

plan for each

simulation

scenario.

A

sketchsiteplanshouldbe developedforeach

scenarioto

make

sure the

program

represented in the simulation is realistic and achievable under

existingorproposed developmentordinances.

An

otherwise valuable simulation can bediscredited

if,forexample, it violates thezoningordinance's

setback, height, buffer, or appearance standards.

Once

the sketch site plan is developed, the next step in building the simulation is to

skew

and

overlay the scanned site plan into the initial

photograph. This

becomes

the base

map

upon whichthesimulationis built. Figure 8

shows

the

subdivision plan created as the first step in

developing Figure 6B,

skewed

into the proper

perspective and then superimposed on the base

photograph ofFigure 6A.

C.

When

presenting simulations, indicate the

program-specific quantities visualized.

Validitycan begiventoasimulation scenario

byindicatingthe specificdevelopmentprogramthat

is depicted in the simulation,such as thetotal lot

yield,gross residential density,site

FAR,

building

square

footage,

parking

counts, etc.

The

developmentprogramdatashould be basedon and

obtained from the sketch site plan prepared for thesimulation. If thisinformation isnotprovided

to the viewer

when

the image is displayed, then

one

must

at least be prepared to

answer

such

questions

when

asked,or elseruntheriskoflosing

credibilityintheeyesofthepublic. Ifthesimulation

only coverspartofa subjectsite,one

may

needto be able todescribe notonly the quantities

shown

in thesimulationphoto, but also the quantitiesthat

occuroff-photoon thebalanceofthe site.

D.

The

initial

photograph should

he

from

a

view that captures

an

appropriate area to

demonstrate the relevant issues.

Selecting thecorrectphotographto start with

isimportanttothesuccessofthesimulation. Take

numerous

photographs of each location from a

varietyofangles.

A

good

ruleof

thumb

isthat the

changes inthesimulationshouldcoverfrom 1/3to

2/3 ofthe existingphotograph(seeSimulations2,

3,and 6). This leavesenough ofthe photograph

FigureS:Subdivisionplan created asthefirststepindevelopingFig.

6B

unchanged

in the final simulation to provide

contextfortheaudiencetoorientthemselves and

quickly identifythechanges

made

totheexisting

environment. Note that while it appears at first

that

more

than2/3ofthebasephotoforSimulations

1 and4 have beenchanged,the

roadway

isinfact

theunchanging elementthat orientsthe viewer.

Use

ground-levelphotographsforsmallersites

where

thesimulationisaddressingissuesfromthe

automotive or pedestrian experience. Aerial

photographs

are best

used

to

demonstrate

relationshipsbetweennearbyoradjacentland uses

and for

programming

decisions for larger sites.

Perspectiveaerialphotographs tend be understood

more

easily by the public than plan-view

ortho-photos. Aerialphotographs

may

require additional

explanationorlabelingabouttheirlocation.

Be

awarethatthebroaderthegeographicarea

shown

in the photograph, the less detail can be

shown

in the simulation. For example, the high

leveloffinishinganddetail

shown

inSimulations

1. 4. or 7

-

including building fenestration, cafe

tables, andornamentalstreetlights

-

couldnotbe

feasibly

shown

inSimulations 2,3,5, or6.

E. Limitsimulation detailto thatnecessaryto

address the defined issues.

Too

much

photorealism or detail can cause

theviewer'sfocustoshiftfromdesignandplanning concepts to design details.

The

level ofdetail

needed ina simulationis a functionofthe issues

thatthe simulationisaddressing. Less photorealism

anddetailareappropriate

when

illustratingissues

concerning broad land use issues, such as in

Simulations3and6.whileahigher degreeofdetail

andphotorealismisrequiredfortheevaluationof designissues, suchasin Simulations 1 and4.

When

presentingasimulation,itisnecessary

to

keep

the viewers focused on the pertinent

issues. For example,

when

Simulation 1

was

shown

to the public at a

community

meeting, a

number

of people expressed concerns about

buildingcolors,materials,andarchitecturalstyles.

In response, theplanningstaffquickly explained thatthefocusofthesimulation

was

togetfeedback

on

the overall

concept

for

downtown

redevelopment, rather than

on

details of the

individual buildings.

F.

When

photorealism

is calledfor,

pay

attention to peripheral simulation details.

The

realism ofa simulation can be greatly enhancedthroughthe inclusionofperipheraldetails

in a photograph, especially details that suggest

human

activity.

For

example, in Scenario 1

pedestriansandasidewalkcafetable

were

added

to the scene, in order to increase the realism, vitality, and visual appeal to the image.

The

inclusion of pedestrians

and

vehicles in a

photographcanalsohelptheviewertounderstand

the scale ofbuildings and other elements in the

scene.

G.

Review

photosimulationsduringtheir draft

stage.

As

inotherdesign orplanningprojects,interim

review is importantinordertominimizethetime

and

cost in

preparing

a simulation. It is

recommended

that the planning project

team

reviewthedevelopment ofa simulationonce the

sketchsiteplan

upon

which

thesimulationwillbe

built is complete,

and

then again,

when

the

simulationis25 percentand75 percent complete.

Theseinterimreviews allowonetocatchmistakes

or change the simulation parameters at an early

stage

-

which sometimes happens ifthe interim

productrevealsthatthe originalconcept

would

not achieve the desired effect.

H. Limit the complexity /

number

of

issues

demonstrated in a single simulation.

The more complex

a simulation is. the

more

difficultit is for the public to understand. Focus

on one or

two

issues per simulation,

whenever

possible. Limiteachsimulationtoone siteinthe

photograph. Simulationsdemonstratingalterative

landuses orsiteprogramsshouldbelimited2 or3

alternativespersimulation,such asinSimulations

2. 3, and6, in ordertonotconfusetheviewer.

/.

When

presentingsimulations,

show

them

in

a series

_of

incremental changes.

Photo-imaging software allows individual

saved into separate digital photographic overlay

"layers."

By

addingthese layers incrementallyto

the simulation, a scries of photographs can be

developed, with each successive

image

adding

another element to the simulation. In this way,

planners can introduce proposed changes to the

environmentoneor

two

atatime

when

presenting

the simulation to the public. This technique

increases public comprehension ofthe changes

made

to the environment, as well as

how

each

individualelementcontributestothefinaloutcome. This technique canalsobe usedtoevaluatepublic

perception ofa single element by

showing

the

simulation withandwithoutthatclement.

For example, Simulation 1

was

first

shown

to

the public as a series ofseven photographs in a

PowerPoint presentation.

The

first photograph

showed

the existingscene(Figure 1A).

The

second

photographonly

showed

theoverheadutilitylines

removed

andburied,and a bricksidewalk added.

The

third and fourth photographs added the

new

infillbuildings-firstinthebackgroundblock,and

then in the foreground block, respectively.

The

fifthphotoaddedornamentalstreetlightsandtraffic

lights,andthe sixth photoadded street trees.

The

final photo populated the scene with pedestrians

and sidewalkcafe tables(Figure IB). Moreover,

duringthePowerPointpresentationplannerscould

flipback andforth

between

adjacentphotographs

in the series, in order to highlight the impact

associatedwithaddinga particular visualelement.

J. \\

hen

presenting simulations, indicateifthe

scenarioissite-speeifieortypicaltoanarea.

The

needforaphotosimulation canbe driven

byopportunitiesataspecificlocationorbya

more

generalized issue that affects an area or the

community

as awhole. Forexample. Simulation 2

is site-specific,

and

was

driven

by

land use

opportunitiesspecific totheareainthephoto. In

contrast. Simulation 6 addresses alternatives for

suburban development in a rural landscape

-

an

issue not limited tothe farm in Figure6A. That

simulation

was

designed

to be "typical" o\'

development

alternatives that

could

occur

throughout thearea. Nevertheless,

some

citizens

and landowners inferred fromthe simulationthat

the

town

was

advocating fordevelopment ofthis

particular site,and

town

staffhad toexplain that

the simulation

was

not specific tothesite.

Conclusions

Photo simulation can be an extremelyeffective

tool for localplanning. Itislikely tobeatechnique

that will gain ground

among

planners in

coming

years, as the cost of photo simulation services

comes

down

andthe availabilityofsoftwaretools

increases.

When

outsourced,a singlesimulation

may

take

anywhere

from several daysto several

weeksor

more

tocomplete,andcancost

anywhere

from $500

to

$2,000

or

more

(as of 2003).

dependingonthecomplexityofthesimulation.

As

technology improves it

may become more

likely

thatlargermunicipalitieswillbringsuchcapability

in-housc, reducing costs and turn-around time,

which should help

make

these techniques

more

commonplace

withintheprofession.

References

Al-Kodmany,

Kheir, 1999.

"Using

visualization techniques for enhancing

public-participation in planning and design: process,

implementation, and evaluation.

Landscape

and

Urban

Planning." Landscape and

Urban

Planning.

Volume

45, Issue 1,15

September

1999, Pages 37-45.

Town

Center Area Plan,

Town

ofCary,

NC,

Aug. 2001

Open

Space

and

Historic

Resources

Plan,

Town

ofCary,

NC,

Aug. 200

1

Walnut Street Corridor District

-

Standards

and

Guide.

Town

ofCary,

NC,

Nov. 2002.

WEBSITE LINKS

Town

of

Cary

www.townofcary.orti

North

Carolina State University, College

of Design,

Design

Research

and

Extension

Program

www.ncsu.edu/www/ncsu/design/sod5/

research/index.

htm

1

New

Bern,

NC:

Visioning Streetscapes

and

Neighborhoods

www.ncsu.edu/www/ncsu/design/sod5/

research/projects/community/newbcrn2/

Triangle

Visioning

II:

Alternative

Development

Forms Along

River

Corridors

www.ncsu.edu/www/ncsu/design/sod5/

research/projects/land_use/triangle_visioning2/

index.html

Triangle

Visioning:

Opportunities

for

Urban Nodes

www.ncsu.edu/www/ncsu/design/sod5/

research/projects/land_use/triangle_visioning/