Category: suburbia

Images of near-dead suburbia

Some of you may be shocked to learn this, but the Naked City Blog is only a small part of my job. I’m the director of the new PlanCharlotte.org website, part of the UNC Charlotte Urban Institute. The site’s goal, since its launch a few months back, is to cover, in a journalistic way, events and trends in growth, planning, environmental and urban issues from the greater Charlotte region.

Castlebrooke in Kannapolis, about 20 miles northeast of Charlotte

Yesterday PlanCharlotte and the UNCC Urban Institute posted a series of what I think are stunning images by local photographer Nancy Pierce, of a sampling of abandoned subdivisions in the region. They are haunting, depicting nature reclaiming street drains, kudzu climbing over roll-over curbs, a swimming pool in the middle of a scraped-earth lot, subdivision entry gates looking like ancient medieval ruins.

Some of the developments remain stalled, or maybe dead. The top photo is from Apple Creek in Gastonia and Gaston County, about 20 miles west of Charlotte. The one at the end of this is from the site of the former Charlotte Coliseum, where City Park was to have been a large mixed-use development of homes, offices, stores and a hotel. (A proposal to build apartments there is now in the works, the article says.)

Others, too, such as Castlebrooke (shown directly above), may be stirring to life again. As planner Kris Krider of Kannapolis tells PlanCharlotte writer Josh McCann, in retrospect, it might not have been wise for Kannapolis to annex land so far from its core, because that can strain the city’s police force and require new fire stations and water and sewer infrastructure. But the city has already made those investments, and so it needs houses to materialize, to generate revenue to cover costs.

But the photo series and the article, together, should serve as a caution to government leaders as well as private businesses. Is all growth “good” regardless or where or what it is? Can we ever knit these developments into a town or a city, or will they remain isolated pods in remote areas? Or will the kudzu overtake them in the end?

Where Charlotteans once went to see Charlotte Hornets Dell Curry and Muggsy Bogues in action

 
Click here for article.
Click here for photo gallery. 

Suburbia, dissected

Jason Griffiths writes a short essay, “Colonial Vista,” to the suburban Colonial-style house he found in a subdivision in Charlotte – a style ubiquitous in these parts. It’s part of his slide show on “Manifest Destiny: A Guide to the Essential Indifference of American Suburban Housing” on the online forum, Places.

Griffiths is an assistant professor of architecture at the Design School at Arizona State University, hence the prominence of Arizona landscapes in his slide show. He was in Charlotte a few years back, he reports, to help review work at UNC Charlotte. (Want his book? Here’s a link.)

The Colonial-style of housing, he notes, is perhaps more appropriate in North Carolina (which was, for a time, an actual colony) than other places, but, he points out the oddity that “the most abject facade of this building enjoys the most commanding view while the actual front elevation is stubbornly fixated by an abbreviated prospect of the road and the house opposite.”

A Ponzi scheme in suburbia?

First blog of the New Era.

First up – Is suburban development a Ponzi scheme? In “The growth Ponzi scheme, part 1” from New Urban Network, writer Charles Mahron makes this claim: The typical American pattern of development doesn’t support itself. He writes: “The great experiment of suburbanization that America embarked on following World War II has no precedent in human history. As it enters its third generation, the flawed assumptions that were overlooked are now coming back to bite us in a cruel way.”

I think Mahron is onto something, and I know he’s not alone in questioning whether the country and its governments – federal, state and local – can afford to support the immense and spread-out infrastructure we’ve created in the pat 50 years. I know that Charlotte’s Department of Transportation and its Fire Department looked at the cost-savings to be had in fire and emergency services when streets are in a connected network versus cul-de-sac-collector-type patterns.

But has anyone seen any academically rigorous studies that look seriously at this question? It’s easy to hypothesize. Which is why we all do it.

Is LEED truly leading? This article in Miller-McCune, “Is LEED the Gold Standard in Green?” tells of a lawsuit against the well-known  Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design rating system by a New York engineer named Henry Gifford.  He contends the energy savings for LEED-certified buildings can be drastically overrated.
Why is this important? As the article notes, the building sector consumes 49 percent of all energy produced in the United States, and 77 percent of all the electricity produced in the nation is used to operate buildings.” Building more energy-efficient buildings is a huge need. And if the only real rating system available doesn’t, after all, save as much energy as it claims, well, that’s a problem.

LEED, for its part, has been addressing some of the criticisms since before the lawsuit. It has begun requiring certified buildings to track predicted energy savings versus actual savings, and it’s re-inventing its rating program.

For those of you who enjoy reading academic and professional journals, here’s an article in the NCMedicalJournal.com, “Barriers to Municipal Planning for Pedestrians and Bicyclists in North Carolina.”  The Cliff’s Notes version: There isn’t enough money, and priorities are elsewhere, and it’s worse in rural areas than urban ones.

As always, a link to an article doesn’t necessarily mean I agree with all of it – only that I think you’ll find it interesting and provocative reading.

Seeking solutions to suburban problems

As cities and counties across North Carolina and the nation scour budgets for ways to trim spending and – at least one hopes – make more economically prudent decisions for the future, they should look hard at what last 50 years of spread-out, low-density, auto-focused development has cost them. And how to change those costly ways.

After all, it costs a municipality (and rate-payers) more to spread sewer lines across subdivisions with 2- or 3-houses per acre than across blocks with 20 or 30 dwellings per acre. It costs more to serve cul-de-sac neighborhoods with adequate fire and emergency services, because in order to meet acceptable arrive-by times in areas with disconnected streets, you need more stations and personnel. (Here’s what I wrote in February 2009 about that point – “Sprawl’s dipping into your pocketbook,” and a Charlotte city study that illustrates that point.)

Large expanses of highway right-of-way mean large expanses of property off the tax rolls. Big surface parking lots are not the best way to get high-value property onto the tax rolls. And so on.

But we’ve built our suburban style, single-use neighborhoods with streets that don’t connect and shopping centers you have to drive to. What do we do now?

That’s the topic of an upcoming conference at N.C. State University in Raleigh on Feb. 12: “Sustainable Suburbs: Re-Imagining the Inner Ring.” (Disclosure: I’ll be moderating the conference.)

Here’s my quick two-cents on the overall topic:

Cent No. 1: “Inner-ring suburbs” means different things to different people. Does it mean the first municipalities beyond the city limits of a major city, such as Mint Hill, Matthews, Pineville, etc., regardless of when they were formed and how they were built? Or does it mean neighborhoods built on a suburban template, even those within the limits of the major city, such as Charlotte’s Merry Oaks, Chantilly, Sherwood Forest, even Myers Park? I hope we can define the terms before we end up talking at cross-purposes.

Cent No. 2: Many planners, designers and even transportation officials understand the need for connected, walkable streets, higher-density buildings, mixed uses and access to transit – things lacking in many neighborhoods built after World War II. . But in many instances that form of development still isn’t happening (and wasn’t, when the financial crisis put a stop to almost all development in these parts.) So it would seem that the major stumbling blocks aren’t in planners’ minds, but in other areas: policies and laws, financing practices, existing ordinances, politics, and even in Americans’ cultural expectations. Can those stumbling blocks be overcome?

Conference registration closes Feb. 7. Among the speakers will be:

• William Hudnut III, ex-congressman, ex-16-term mayor of Indianapolis, author, Urban Land Institute fellow emeritus, clergyman and all-around knowledgeable fellow. Among his books: “Halfway to Everywhere: A portrait of America’s first tier suburbs.”

• Ellen Dunham-Jones, co-author of the award-winning “Retrofitting Suburbia: Urban Design Solutions for Redesigning Suburbs.” She’ll talk about the problem of dead malls, vacant commercial strips, aging office parks and apartment complexes. Her book offers several dozen examples of suburban retrofit projects.

• Patrick Phillips, CEO of the nonprofit Urban Land Institute, who’ll talk about what the financial crisis may mean for the prospect of building a more sustainable suburbia.

If you’ve read this far, you’ll almost certainly be interested also in this early February Charlotte conference. The New Partners for Smart Growth conference, “Building Safe, Healthy and Livable Communities,” will draw planners, designers, transportation and public health professionals, and others to the Westin Feb. 3-5. The website says scholarships are available, but deadline to apply is Jan. 14. It’s sponsored by the Local Government Commission, a Sacramento-based nonprofit (and not the N.C. governmental agency).

Seeking solutions to suburban problems

As cities and counties across North Carolina and the nation scour budgets for ways to trim spending and – at least one hopes – make more economically prudent decisions for the future, they should look hard at what last 50 years of spread-out, low-density, auto-focused development has cost them. And how to change those costly ways.

After all, it costs a municipality (and rate-payers) more to spread sewer lines across subdivisions with 2- or 3-houses per acre than across blocks with 20 or 30 dwellings per acre. It costs more to serve cul-de-sac neighborhoods with adequate fire and emergency services, because in order to meet acceptable arrive-by times in areas with disconnected streets, you need more stations and personnel. (Here’s what I wrote in February 2009 about that point – “Sprawl’s dipping into your pocketbook,” and a Charlotte city study that illustrates that point.)

Large expanses of highway right-of-way mean large expanses of property off the tax rolls. Big surface parking lots are not the best way to get high-value property onto the tax rolls. And so on.

But we’ve built our suburban style, single-use neighborhoods with streets that don’t connect and shopping centers you have to drive to. What do we do now?

That’s the topic of an upcoming conference at N.C. State University in Raleigh on Feb. 12: “Sustainable Suburbs: Re-Imagining the Inner Ring.” (Disclosure: I’ll be moderating the conference.)

Here’s my quick two-cents on the overall topic:

Cent No. 1: “Inner-ring suburbs” means different things to different people. Does it mean the first municipalities beyond the city limits of a major city, such as Mint Hill, Matthews, Pineville, etc., regardless of when they were formed and how they were built? Or does it mean neighborhoods built on a suburban template, even those within the limits of the major city, such as Charlotte’s Merry Oaks, Chantilly, Sherwood Forest, even Myers Park? I hope we can define the terms before we end up talking at cross-purposes.

Cent No. 2: Many planners, designers and even transportation officials understand the need for connected, walkable streets, higher-density buildings, mixed uses and access to transit – things lacking in many neighborhoods built after World War II. . But in many instances that form of development still isn’t happening (and wasn’t, when the financial crisis put a stop to almost all development in these parts.) So it would seem that the major stumbling blocks aren’t in planners’ minds, but in other areas: policies and laws, financing practices, existing ordinances, politics, and even in Americans’ cultural expectations. Can those stumbling blocks be overcome?

Conference registration closes Feb. 7. Among the speakers will be:

• William Hudnut III, ex-congressman, ex-16-term mayor of Indianapolis, author, Urban Land Institute fellow emeritus, clergyman and all-around knowledgeable fellow. Among his books: “Halfway to Everywhere: A portrait of America’s first tier suburbs.”

• Ellen Dunham-Jones, co-author of the award-winning “Retrofitting Suburbia: Urban Design Solutions for Redesigning Suburbs.” She’ll talk about the problem of dead malls, vacant commercial strips, aging office parks and apartment complexes. Her book offers several dozen examples of suburban retrofit projects.

• Patrick Phillips, CEO of the nonprofit Urban Land Institute, who’ll talk about what the financial crisis may mean for the prospect of building a more sustainable suburbia.

If you’ve read this far, you’ll almost certainly be interested also in this early February Charlotte conference. The New Partners for Smart Growth conference, “Building Safe, Healthy and Livable Communities,” will draw planners, designers, transportation and public health professionals, and others to the Westin Feb. 3-5. The website says scholarships are available, but deadline to apply is Jan. 14. It’s sponsored by the Local Government Commission, a Sacramento-based nonprofit (and not the N.C. governmental agency).

Why conservatives should love transit, and more

A few links to interesting reading: A piece on “Why Conservatives Should Care About Transit,” here.
One provocative excerpt: “Support for government-subsidized highway projects and contempt for efficient mass transit does not follow from any of the core principles of social conservatism.
A common misperception is that the current American state of auto-dependency is a result of the free market doing its work. In fact, a variety of government interventions ensure that the transportation ‘market’ is skewed towards car-ownership.”

A wonderful profile of Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood by the NY Times’ inimitable Mark Leibovich here.
Here’s a closer look at the new state of Virginia standards that won’t put state highway money into developments that don’t meet a connectivity index. The article is from New Urban News, and it criticizes VaDOT for not being aggressive enough with its connectivity standards.
It also references the study done in Charlotte by CDOT and Fire Department staff that found more cost-efficiency for emergency services in connected neighborhoods than in cul-de-sac-collector neighborhoods. Here’s a link to where I wrote about it, and here’s a link to a slide show about the study itself.

(Note, Delaware is doing something akin to Virginia. The New Urban News main web site says: Delaware mandates connected streets The Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT), which has jurisdiction over most streets and roads in its state, is — like Virginia — requiring that new subdivision streets be connected to neighboring areas.

From the Colorado-based High Country News, a piece on the possible end of Exurbia, at least in the West.

A word about that story: I’ve read several pieces in recent months in which people say suburbia is on its last gasps, and the recession will kill it. I’m skeptical. Among other reasons: At least in my neck of suburbia (Charlotte), financial stress means people are less mobile than before – they can’t sell their houses, or find jobs to move to. Thus, they are not leaving exurbia even if the want to. In addition, housing in the far ‘burbs is still, dirt for dirt, cheaper than in the city (vast exurban McMansions and uptown luxury condos notwithstanding.

Many “Death of Suburbia” themes are premised on the assumption energy prices will rise. I believe they will, and savings from cheap housing will be undercut by the gasoline prices needed for long commutes to work and shopping. But for now gas prices seem to have stabilized. Further, local governments around here – and I suspect elsewhere – are in no mood to crack down on any kind of development, there being, for now, virtually none going on.

Bits: Trails, transportation, go-go-suburbia

A few quick links of interest:

The Carolina Thread Trail project recently got its 100th Resolution of Support — from the Town of Wingate in Union County. That represents at least one entity from every county within the 15-county footprint. The Thread Trail is a proposed regional network of trails, including greenways, riverside trails and conservation corridors. Local communities plan and build their own portions.

Derrick Jackson of the Boston Globe writes about The Transformation of Transportation — big increases in transit ridership all over the country, and opines that it makes more sense to put federal dollars into transit systems than to prop up auto companies that are eliminating jobs.

NationalJournal.com talks with new Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. LaHood says high-speed rail between cities is, if not No. 1 on President Obama’s priority list, then near the top. He predicted a substantial effort (read, “money”) in coming years in five or six regions of the country, beyond the $8 billion in the stimulus package that just passed Congress.

David Brooks’ recent N.Y. Times piece, “I Dream of Denver,” (it ran last Thursday in The Observer) provoked tons of discussion. Interestingly, in Brooks’ speech in Raleigh on Feb. 10 he challenged the viability of the suburbs. “The era of go-go suburbia — it’s obviously over now,” he said. People wanted the big house, the big yard, but found out there weren’t enough social bonds, he said. Suburbia, he says, “ignored key parts of human nature.”

But his column took a differnt tack. Here are a couple of responses, one from “Joe Urban,” A.K.A. Sam Newberg in Minneapolis, one from Ben Fried on streetsblog.
Here’s a link to the Pew Center report Brooks cites.