Wow, time flies. I apologize for going so long without posting. Now to the topic at hand.
In the past 50 or 60 years urban expansion (sprawl) in the United States has been unprecedented. Writers attribute this growth to the convergence of a rising population, increasing incomes, and falling commuting costs. Because of the impressive highway system and corridor development in the US, the more affluent continue to move further out of the city centers and the poor remain in the older housing stock contained within. Many Americans view this urban sprawl as a bad thing that contributes to alienation, air pollution, obesity, segregation, the concentration of poverty, and any number of other negative aspects of American life. I personally tend to agree that this pattern of growth is unhealthy for the system, primarily based on the notion that extending infrastructure costs more than the revenues it can generate for local governments, straining their ability to provide necessary and demanded services. But I think this pattern of growth is changing, and we are in the midst of an evolutionary shift that will bring about its own unique problems.
European cities, in contrast to American cities, principally concentrate affluence and wealth in the city centers and have poor suburbs. This may be because of the relative age of European cities compared to the US, among any number of other aesthetic reasons. I believe that many US cities are moving the same direction, however. The filtering theory of urban systems posits that rings of housing development around the urban core “filter” from higher socio-economic populations down as the housing stock grows old and deteriorates. I believe that this latest wave of housing growth will leave us with vast neighborhoods of mediocre housing stock that will run down in 10 to 20 years, leaving whole suburban developments undesirable to the affluent home buyers and becoming available to lower socio-economic cohorts. These wealthier purchasers are going to be looking for well-built (or rebuilt) homes - and the solid neighborhoods built in earlier periods closer in to the city centers are going to become more attractive. This is already happening in Austin.
In addition, as a good friend pointed out to me recently, with gas prices continuing to rise we will no longer be thinking about the miles-per-gallon we get with our automobiles, but instead about the dollars-per-trip we make. For example, it costs me nearly $2 a day to drive to school. As that commuting cost increases (not to mention congestion), the trade-off for the house in the suburbs with the big yard and white picket fence is going to becoming increasingly unattractive. This will also drive the more affluent families further into town, displacing the poor and pushing them out.
Finally, the new urban living trend of small condos downtown will also drive some of this evolution. And this trend is not only occurring in the “hip” young cities. In towns as different as Spokane, Washington, Waco, Texas, and New Orleans, Louisiana, buildings are being converted into lofts faster than the for sale signs can be printed. I can’t go anywhere without seeing advertisements for this rebirth living in walkable communities close to both work and play. I am a big fan of this movement, but believe it will carry with it social costs that few are considering when they move in to their new condos.
What does all this add up to? I think we are in the midst of a vast shift in the urban nature of America. Mimicking many European cities, our urban centers are becoming the centers of wealth and affluence and the poor are being scattered and pushed outward. With this shift comes both positive and negative externalities that need to be considered (perhaps in a follow-up blog post), but we need to start thinking about this paradigm shift right now if we are to both capitalize on and accommodate this change.
One Comment
I couldn’t agree with you more Eric..
It’s happening here in Arizona too!
-Ryan Charleston
http://www.urev.net
Post a Comment