Urban vs. Suburban Lifestyle

[helsinki]

Excellent article at Planetizen on this topic:

http://www.planetizen.com/node/58979

My favorite paragraph:

"Finally, a region could limit new infrastructure to transit, but could deregulate infill development. This policy was what most American cities followed until the 1920s, and would in some ways create truly smart growth: housing prices would not be out of control because housing supply would expand to meet population growth, yet because new development would frequently be in transit-friendly aresa, transportation costs would be low too and commuting would not be a significant contributor to pollution."

I think the greatest hurdle to realizing this is what Twin Cities Sidewalks described as the unholy alliance between local politicians, developers, the construction industry, and the feds. Everyone wants to be seen as "doing something" to help the economy. Build a highway spur into virgin farmland, the price shoots up, houses get built, jobs created, housing costs go down for a bit, then they go back up, repeat. It's a mindless, short sighted policy. Best way to prevent it: stop building new highways (like MA, check out their policy of fixing all existing infrastructure before spending any money on new), stop building new sewer connections on the fringe (looking at you, MetCouncil), stop restricting density in the core through NIMBY zoning.

[Nick]

http://www.startribune.com/local/south/ ... page=1&c=y

The city of New Prague just threw a party to celebrate completion of a state-of-the-art sewer plant.

But the gathering that really means something to the city's pocketbooks will take place soon in a conference room in St. Paul, where New Prague officials will ask the state to loosen the financial noose the $30 million project is tightening around the city's neck.

The plant is one of many built amid a turn-of-the-century explosion in the populations of rural towns on the fringe of the metro area. But the exurban boom has gone bust, leaving cities such as New Prague, Avon and North Branch struggling to pay for the facilities.

[...]

I smells me an opportunity to expand the Met Council's jurisdiction, but I'm sure we'll mess it up somehow.

[helsinki]

^ Fascinating article. Three things stood out for me:

1. There is an institution called the PFA. Who knew? It apparently "administers and oversees the financial management of three revolving loan funds and other programs that help local units of government construct facilities for clean water" (See http://www.positivelyminnesota.com/Gove ... index.aspx)
That it spent $150 million on projects 'in anticipation of growth' is an exasperating reminder of the elaborate financial architecture underpinning the expansion of suburbia.

2. The article highlights an important and often overlooked point: exurbia is, essentially, for the poor. Instead of creating sustainable affordable housing near drivers of employment, our current model creates 'affordability' through the consumption of cheap land. It can't last (land won't stay cheap, neither will gas; the average American household spends over 2/3 of its income on housing and transportation. That's crazy).

3. The article doesn't even begin to address whether 'growth' (which, as I like to constantly remind people, is, for it's own sake, the ideology of cancer) is a good thing or not. "Well, hopefully housing construction picks up" is about the extent of the article's forecasting. Yes, this might temporarily solve the self-inflicted financial dilemma faced by New Prague; it would be terrible long-term policy. Does New Prague need tens of thousands of new residents? No.

[seanrichardryan]

[snip]...our current model creates 'affordability' through the consumption of cheap land. It can't last (land won't stay cheap...

Land (farmland in particular) isn't cheap right now, its at an all time high, practically a bubble. That said, the exurban model is fading fast.

[woofner]

Land (farmland in particular) isn't cheap right now, its at an all time high, practically a bubble. That said, the exurban model is fading fast.

Put them together. Greenfield single-family home development is coming back (although it's nowhere near where it was 10 years ago) but it's not happening in the exurbs. It's mostly happening in the outer rings, where there isn't enough contiguous open space for economical farming anyway. This may be a temporary thing or it may be a new economic reality. I think there are good arguments for either, although policymakers should be encouraging the latter.

[Aville_37]

Interesting article I found online. Haven't had time to read it completely - but speaks to the importance of cities keeping the aging Millennials as they marry and have kids. Highlights - importance of transit, good schools, open space (Oklahoma City is building a 70 acre downtown park?). I think Mpls. is on the right track - but as always - wish there was less red tape and financing to get some of these infrastructure and design plans into place on fast track.

[Aville_37]

Interesting article I found online. Haven't had time to read it completely - but speaks to the importance of cities keeping the aging Millennials as they marry and have kids. Highlights - importance of transit, good schools, open space (Oklahoma City is building a 70 acre downtown park?). I think Mpls. is on the right track - but as always - wish there was less red tape and financing to get some of these infrastructure and design plans into place on fast track.

Oops - sorry. Here's the link to the article: American Cities to Millennials: Don't leave from USA Today.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... s/1744357/

[Nick]

Are we getting back to the same old same old? Even with gas still around $3.00? There are some good early comments.

http://www.startribune.com/local/west/184573221.html

Suburbia is sprouting in the open fields of Medina

A burst of new subdivisions with names like the Enclave and Fields in Medina has the city at odds over how to grow while keeping the character and feel of a community known for its horse farms and large homes on sprawling lots.

The City Council approved the most recent project last week, against the recommendation of the city's Planning Commission, whose chairman called it "boring" and said it "smacks of Plymouth." Debate has focused on the layout and mix of housing in some of the subdivisions, part of the westward march of development that has filled in much of nearby Maple Grove and Plymouth.

[...]

[VAStationDude]

Construction in exurbia has basically halted and there remains a large number of foreclosures that have to be worked through for there ever to be new homes built there again. I seems we're seeing upper end housing built in fourth ring suburbs like Medina and Chanhassen but none of the $100,000-$150,000 track homes that sprung up in outer suburban counties like Wright and Chisago. Keep in mind a person who can afford a $400,000 house probably needs to put down at least $50k at closing and have an income of at least $110,000 a year. At those income levels $5 a gallon gasoline would still be a very small part of their overall budget. For middle income families in Buffalo, which is 20 miles west of Medina, expensive gas is crippling. I think we're seeing a new more sustainable and balanced normal. Fewer new homes overall, almost zero exurban building and a renewed interest in city living. There are still a number of people who can't afford Edina but don't want Minneapolis or Richfield so they settle for Blaine or Maple Grove. Others end up in the city or first ring suburbs.

[twincitizen]

I stumbled upon this entry on Urbanophile that relates to this conversation: http://www.urbanophile.com/2012/12/17/r ... ere-broke/

[mattaudio]

It's an echo of StrongTowns.

[Minneapolisite]

Suburbia: proof that the masses when left to their own devices are mindless, uncultured boobs. -- Me.

[twincitizen]

Humorous urban/suburban debate sprung up in this story about Nordstrom opening at Ridgedale: http://www.startribune.com/business/185659522.html

The anti-urban comments are very typical, yet still depressing. Surprisingly none have even hinted at racism...shocking Strib, shocking.

[helsinki]

Further support for the sprawl-is-a-federal-government-spawned-development-form thesis, for all those Doubting Thomas's out there:

http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/docum ... estate.pdf

And the excellent Atlantic Cities article about it: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politi ... rket/4337/

(On page 6, there is also this good little laundry-list of ways that local governments enforce and perpetuate sprawl: "Zoning codes, parking regulations, development fees, tax abatements, financing programs, infrastructure spending, caps on the number of building permits issued, allowable uses on properties and specific requirements in sewer and water districts." -- Note how most of these are laws [aside from financing and infrastructure spending]. Laws are political choices backed by coercion. In short, the exact opposite of a free market where autonomous actors are supposed to make independent decisions [although arguably a free market can only exist if property rights exist, and property rights can only exist where there exists a legal, i.e. government, recognition and protection of said rights, so technically a free market can only exist where property law is enforced by the government, 'enforcement' is a euphemism for coercion, so although it seems rather paradoxical, the implication is that freedom of action requires coercion; but this is perhaps a bit esoteric]. -- My general point is that all levels of government are mucking things up here.)

It is interesting how Strong Towns' message (and 'Antifragile' intellectual underpinnings) completely upset the received wisdom about development. Both conservatives/liberals and republicans/democrats appear to support continued federal meddling in the real estate market. The political imperative to Do Something empowers the imposition of so-called "Soviet-Harvard" over-theorizing onto local land use and transportation decisions.

The more I learn about this approach, the more convincing it becomes to me: The price we pay for things should reflect their true cost. We should call things by their real names. Such simple axioms, but when it comes to the debate about building cities, they seem to be totally absent.

[Viktor Vaughn]

The NY Times has a surprisingly interesting article called 'Creating Hipsturbia.' It's a twist on the decades old meme of grown-up kids leaving the city for greener suburban pastures.

The Manhattanization of Brooklyn has priced out trustfundless hipsters.

"While this colonization is still in its early stages, it is different from the suburban flight of decades earlier, when young parents fled a city consumed by crime and drugs. These days, young creatives are fleeing a city that has become too affluent."

Tellingly, these Brooklyn refugees aren't headed for sprawling-big-box-post-war-suburbs, but rather old Hudson River towns with walkable mainstreets and good transit.

Indeed, the sturdy, retro, all-American character of the river towns fits well with the whole Filson/Woolrich heritage-brand aesthetic. People who set their cultural compass to the Brooklyn Flea appreciate the authenticity. “Hastings-on-Hudson is a village, in a Wittgensteinian sort of way,” Mr. Wallach said. He added, “We are constantly hearing about the slow-food movement, the slow-learning movement and the slow-everything-else. So why not just go avant-garde into a slow-village movement?”

Obviously, Minneapolis is a far cry from NY City. We don't exactly have exiled Russian oligarchs & Goldman bankers bidding up properties. Also, given it's geography, the NYC street grid can't exactly extend to first ring suburbs like Richfield & Columbia Heights. Encroaching affluence is unlikely to push the rent on a Northeast Mpls duplex north of $5k/month anytime soon, but the lower housing prices just north of the city border persuaded my friend who wanted to stay in NE, to buy a house in Columbia Heights instead.

But I'm curious if others think old river/railroad towns like Robinsdale, Hopkins, Hastings, Anoka may be colonized into little hipster havens. Is Travail in Robinsdale a sign of things to come?

[mplsjaromir]

The NYT made the same claim in 2011 as well. NYT trend pieces tend to get lambasted for not being based on data. I think that is true for these articles as well. Hipster Hudson 2011

[Viktor Vaughn]

Funny. At least the 2011 piece was in the NY Region section. The one I linked to will be in tomorrow's Sunday Styles with the wedding announcements. Yet, I thought it was a pretty well researched piece. It's no Frontline investigation, but I'm not really sure how they could of included more data or hard evidence.

[mplsjaromir]

Oh, I think some of those style pieces like "Owning cats among single men is gaining popularity" or "Potbellies are now hip" are silly. Well written but no actual data. I think Minneapolis has lots of untapped potential unlike New York.

[Viktor Vaughn]

I completely agree with both of your points. Most of the Northside has yet to be colonized by the brunch crowd... aaahhhh... poor choice of words...I'll stick with "gentrify." And maybe I should cancel that "Colonize North Minneapolis" bumper sticker order.

[mplsjaromir]

I found my way to an interesting article about urbanism.

Narrow Streets

If you find Japanese street fashion abhorrent and decide you cannot read the post I can give y'all the gist.

If a city wants to have lots of walking and street life all a city has to do is have really narrow streets. The article talks about 10'-30' wide streets, no joke. No sidewalks, no street parking, no automobile roadway. Basically a flat surface from building facade to building facade. No setbacks, no lawns.

This is far more radical than what even the folks over at Strong Towns preach, which this article would call Strong Towns approach "19th Century Hypertrophic pattern". Further she calls any American city built after 1780 a failure in terms of design and goes on to say that people so readily left for the suburbs because of the unpleasantness of the typical street setup. Two to four auto traffic in the middle, street parking, a green buffer and then a sidewalk.

Is there anywhere in the Twin Cites where one could try to do something so radical? Is there anyway it could possibly be successful?