New Visions for Metropolitan America

New Visions for Metropolitan America by Anthony Downs

The car-centric low-density suburban pattern has dominated American development since the end of World War II. New suburbs have autonomy and encourage comercial, retail and housing development within their boundaries. They enforce ever stricter zoning and building codes to provide higher-quality housing. The poor are priced out of new suburbs and find themselves confined to older inner-city developments of lower quality. Eventually, some of the more well-to-do inner-city residents can migrate to older inner-ring suburbs that have fallen out of favor, however, most remain confined to to the inner ghetto. The inner city often ends up a high poverty, high crime area, with few working class jobs, yet it still supports regional immenties. The disparate pattern of development also results in increased car-centric commute times.

The solutions proposed in the book seek to improve the condition of everyone in the metropolitan area. Regional bodies and regulation will help everyone in the metropolitan area. Increasing density will allow for more affordable housing and reduced commute times. Greenbelts and growth boundaries will help improve the conditions of everyone. Getting there is the challenge. People like having responsive, small scale governments. Government officials like to showcase short term improvements. There is little patience for improvements that take a long time to show results in the long term, especially if they involve sacrifices.

The author has identified many of the challenges to improve the quality of metropolitan areas. Getting a workable solution is a challenge. Even the best set plans can be subverted by inertia and vested interests. It is interesting that in passing he mentions societies decision to turn the mentally ill out in society. That, together with drug epidemics and high housing costs has produced a homeless crisis. That has attracted immediate concern. Alas, it seems most people are eager to throw lots of money at housing authorities and hope it goes away. Nobody wants to address the root causes (especially the housing authorities). It seems society has tried to opt for the "most expensive" solution for housing, and fumbling with it.  

On transportation, we have a mixed result. We are still building far-flung suburbs and spending money to expand roads. However, we are spending billions of dollars on new public transportation infrastructure. It looks good and produces plenty of pork, but not necessarily improvements. In Seattle, Sound Transit is a government agency responsible for light rail and longer-distance buses. Most of the board is made up primarily of local officials. There is also incredible attention to geographical equity. However, the agency is required to get local approval for all work. This allows local suburbs to extract demands from the transit agency. The transit agency has become a money pot that has provided road improvements, parking garages and other car-centric infrastructure. Local governments have specifically fought rail alignments near high density areas due to perceived impacts. Instead, much of the rail line has been near suburban freeways with limited density (or even potential density.) It may be succeeding now. Is this the first step in the improved metropolitan development, or will this be the cautionary case that will prevent the positive long-term goal?

Neighborhoods and Urban Development

Neighborhoods and Urban Development by Anthony Downs

We all live in neighborhoods, yet defining one could be a challenge. With smaller towns, the neighborhood is coterminous with the community boundary. Larger cities often have a large number of neighborhoods. These may have overlapping boundaries. The neighborhood is often where people live and participate in some acts of social life. There may or may not be a responding council or government entity. The author acknowledges the ambiguity of the term neighborhood. However, we can generally understand what one is and what we can expect from it.

The book was written nearly a half-century ago. Some of the details have changed, but the general process and challenge remain. Neighborhood undergo a life-cycle. The neighborhood is born of new development. It is generally well-maintained at first. Later it may fall on harder times. It is not the newest part of the metro area. It might experience a rebirth and become the trendy new area. Or more likely it moves down the income ladder. Most neighborhoods will stay here. Some neighborhoods will fall precipitously. Rents don't cover maintenance. Property tax becomes a burden for homeowners. The building stock is crumbling. It may be abandoned. For many, (especially frame houses), the best solution is to bulldoze it. There may be a chance to redevelop, but it is hard.

Race poses some interesting twists. Often, a neighborhood will not change due to "flight", but instead due to lack of white replacement. Neighborhoods have a common rate of regular turnover when people move in an out each year.  A homogenous neighborhood will see similar people replacing those that move out. However, after a few people of a different group move in, the next move ins are more likely to be from the minority than the original group. As more natural move outs occur, the neighborhood pivots to a new minority. The book gives the example of white/black switch, but this is seen in other racial or ethnic groups.

Also interesting is the display of black/white income and location. The highest income white areas are furthest from the white areas. Then income goes steadily lower until the integration zone is reach. Then a higher income black zone starts that steadily decreases. The black zone has a higher income than the adjacent white zone. (This is similar to what I have observed in Chicago.) However, the pioneer black homeowners often don't capture the premium. They pay more for the house in the transitioning neighborhoods. Some mixed neighborhoods do remain, but it often requires external forces to keep them integrated. The book gives an example of building racial quotas. Other cases may be places like Hyde Park in Chicago. The neighborhood is home to a black well-to-do (such as Obama). The University helps to balance it out with a regular influx of students and professors of other races. 

Government intervention has contributed to the hard times of the central city. The government helps subsidize new roads, sewers and buildings, yet does little to help for the maintenance of what already exists. The natural migration leaves the central city with some of the poorest neighborhoods and most needy population. It also maintains many of the region-wide amenities (sports stadiums, parks, concert venues, etc.) The city often has higher tax burdens. 

The poorest people also suffer from lack of housing. Building codes set a floor on quality and size of housing. This often prices people out. of even the cheapest housing. To provide housing, cities must subsidized housing for the lowest income residents or let them live in "substandard" housing (often through selective code enforcement.) Suburbs will often add even more requirements, making housing even more unaffordable.

The book has a very straightforward look at neighborhoods and their conditions. It is not afraid to tell things as they are and present solutions from different sides. Often the problem can come from opposite directions, as can the solution. It is important to be open to different options. Injecting huge sums of money may not help if it doesn't lead to a turn around of the underlying issues. On the other hand, sometimes just talking about a policy can be enough to turn things around. Neighborhoods are complex.