Home » Articles posted by Steve ( » Page 2)

Author Archives: Steve

Line up the Urbanists

Posted on by

(If you’re not familiar with A Chorus Line, and I wasn’t, you’ll need to watch this…not the version my niece was in!)

What is the “dance 10, looks 3” of cities? Given it’s a metaphor I’m sure there are multiple answers that could work, but the first one that springs to mind in my little corner of the world is the curse of “good bones”; that sort of backhanded complement delivered with a shake of the head, or a scratch of the chin. Their lips say: How could a place with such good bones be so overlooked, so down on its luck, so much in decline?

They’re thinking: this place is a $#|%hole.

As in: cold winters; humid summers; wet, well, all the time; the wrong type of “diversity”; lots of legacy coolness, not so much in the here and now; no Ivy League school; not the state capital. So what do you do? 

Whatever it takes.

As I watched my niece play the role of the “dance 10, looks 3” girl in her (impressive) high school production of A Chorus Line I couldn’t help but see in the carefully crafted and delineated types of Broadway dancers, with their differing strengths and weaknesses, goals and desires, motivations and fears; an allegory for the urbanists I know, and read, and listen to. I’m this Johnny-One-Note with my community of concern tucked away in a little corner of the Northeast. A real Johnny, Johnny Sanphillippo, treks all over the continent taking notes on and photographs of everything from declining Rust Belt cities to the most cutting edge places and ideas on the Left Coast. Kunstler, he’s said his piece, written his books, fiction and non-fiction, and now just scrawls a new “The End is Near” sandwich board every Monday and Friday. And all the rest,  just like the winners and losers in “A Chorus Line” they have their stories and their demons.

I have to ask myself what it means to not “give a fuck about the red shoes” in my urbanist allegory? I think it’s being purely about results, not process. For some of the others it’s a philosophical, theoretical, esoteric activity. If the complete implementation of the purest ideological urbanism doesn’t create the vibrant successful city they’re looking for, it’s off to the next. It reminds me a bit of the people who give professional development programs to teachers and present those great ideas for engaging the students. Cool. Now to just do that 179 more times…this year…in every class and across every course! Yeah. Not every lesson is going to be the “Citizen Kane” of classroom instruction. In school teaching, in urban design, expecting the actual execution to resemble its platonic ideal is a recipe for frustration and burnout. 

And for those of us who experience all of the strident lectures about what this or that should be like or just how much more of a positive attitude we should have about this or that remarkably difficult challenge…the one thing that can be counted on is that the person expressing these impossible to live up to standards will be g o n e before too long. In teaching, as in building community, anyone can “bring it” for a year or two, or even three, but staying in it for the long haul, staying around long enough to watch what actually happens, decade in, and decade out, is the real test. There was one particular blogger, years ago, lauding the attributes of a down on its luck provincial city and talking all about what a great place it was to live; until she got a better offer! Adiós. What every town needs is a millenial willing to tell everyone how it’s a great place to put down roots, make a life, be in it for the long haul…and then move to the hottest hipster haven.

People who stay might experience something like this: The owner of your AHL franchise, after years of weak support, decides to move to Tucson, Arizona. So your MGM enabled business community steals the well supported Portland, Maine AHL affiliate right out from under Portland’s nose…a nose which has just paid millions to refurbish their arena. If you weren’t selling your soul to an enormous resort casino would a local partner in that development have cobbled together an ownership group to bring a replacement franchise to the city with the lowest attendance in the league? Doubtful. Nice guys finish last. Ugly dancers don’t get gigs on Broadway. Tell me that for you, in your town, the ends don’t justify the means and I’m guessing you’re willing to switch towns. That’s not really the moral high ground. Above me maybe, but still not the high ground. 

If Springfield were in the running to steal the AAA Red Sox from Pawtucket, like Worcester is, would an argument that spending millions of public dollars on highly profitable entertainment ventures is wrong make me demand that my local political leaders cease and desist in this race to the bottom? No it would not. Show me a system where everyone else has unilaterally disarmed then maybe (maybe) I would too, but knowing the winner of this competition will need to sweeten the pot, I’d find every nickel I could to throw at the millionaires of the Fenway Group. 

Dance 10, looks 3.

If this were about what it should be about we’d be in better shape than we are. When you sneak a peak at your dance card, or “just look around and see who is getting hired” and you can see that it’s not about what it’s supposed to be about, then I’d be surprised if you didn’t go in for a little “T & A” augmentation as well. I’m in this thing to see my city come out of its funk, not to convince Peoria to improve its walkability. If you’re not about that one place, that particular place, that special place, then I’m probably not for you. 

In A Chorus Line terms: I’m getting the boob job. In baseball terms, I’m bunting to break up the no hitter. In soccer, I’m diving in their box and parking the bus in my own. If you’re not willing to do those things it’s either because you don’t need to, or you have no loyalty to the team anyway.

Viva el Betis manque pierda.

Chuck’s Response 

Posted on by

I sent the text of the post entitled Magically Fallacious to Chuck Marohn before I published it. The interchange didn’t seem particularly enlightening so I didn’t include it. At Chuck’s request I’m posting it now:

(Chuck’s response)

Thanks for the interest and passion. I feel you’re falling into the trap of taking each utterance as a discrete thing instead of part of a larger body of work. Of course I’m not for highway interchanges and parking lots, but I’m also a skeptic of the person who thinks they can get a big budget and solve the world’s problems. We empower charlatans and fools when we think we’re so smart.

I know the starting point — better than most — and I know the destination. It’s each step on the journey I don’t feel confident prescribing, so we take them a step at a time and see what happens. 

What I see is a lot of people who are basically clueless about the starting point (except their one or two things that bother them), have an obsession about solving a problem and are ready to put on a jet pack and get to that destination as quickly as possible, everything else be damned. Well, those people are the problem in my world. 

Hope that makes sense.
-chuck

(My response)

That you “know the starting point — better than most — and…”know the destination” is my point! It’s really not about scale. Of course I understand that at the micro level “knowing where to put the crosswalk” can/should be tested first before it’s permanently installed, but that doesn’t mean that you can’t see that a few million dollars to better link a dozen solid traditional city/town centers is better spent than some fraction of that amount to spur on more auto oriented horizontal development in an ex-urban environment! 

Some bigger ideas are good, and some smaller ideas are really bad. Incrementalism can do wonders, I agree, but there are silver bullets which hit the bulls eye too!

(Chuck’s response)

I’m sorry, but I think you misunderstand me. Probably my fault.

Yes, we know the destination — or we think we know — but as with all long and endless journeys, the destination will change over time. Working incrementally respects that and actually induces it. We’re never done. Silver bullets have place in an approach that is never done.

-chuck 

I assume that the last line contains a typo and was meant to read: “Silver bullets have NO place in an approach that is never done.” My lived experience in a place which has its share of silver bullet projects is that many of them have proven invaluable to the city’s survival and progress. If I’m wrong and it was supposed to read: Silver bullets CAN have A place in an approach that is never done” then I concur. To me, the podcast which inspired this post was a call to engage. I did so. If my polemics were “dickish” so be it, given that Chuck doesn’t cede the point that scale isn’t the only operative characteristic in moving forward, I assume that he disagrees. Great. I’ve made him aware that one proud, founding member of Strong Towns disagrees.

Curb Your Enthusiasm

Posted on by

There are times to be a cheerleader. As a teacher, a coach, a parent sometimes your job is to just give others a sense that they can accomplish what they’ve set forth to do. But being all “rah, rah, sis, boom, bah” can have its downside as well. Telling someone that they can “if they just try hard enough” or if they “just believe” sufficiently can be incredibly destructive when they put forth their best effort and feel assured of success and they fail; sometimes utterly and absolutely. Perhaps having a thoroughly optimistic outlook can make achievement more likely, but tempering positivity with the reality that dreams fail, efforts can be in vain, and others can be better prepared for success can create a resilience which helps people optimize their circumstances relative to their goals, abilities, and resources in the long run.

I’m a contrarian. I don’t put any effort into it, it just happens. I hear someone, anyone, make a broad strokes assertion about something and I can’t help but think about all of the possible situations and circumstances where it might be wrong. Sometimes it’s useful, but I’ll admit that often, it isn’t. Even platitudes set me off: Is honesty the best policy, really? I mean, lying all the time has got to be hard, but always telling people what you really think all the time? Good luck with that!

And that brings me around to Rational Urbanism and its raison d’être: living in any one of the uncool urban environments of the United States. I could write a blog where all I did was wax poetic about the interplay of interesting people on the streets, sidewalks, and alleyways of my neighborhood. Who am I kidding? No, I couldn’t. Once in a while it is fun for me to write about a particularly idyllic experience, or express my contentment with a wonderful meal or a particularly uplifting event, but that would become fairly tedious fairly quickly for me and, if I’m not mistaken, for you.

Poverty is not pretty. Whether cause or effect, many people who are poor exhibit pathological behavior which makes living in community with them difficult and frustrating. People from other classes and other cultures value things differently and have both greater and lesser tolerances for things; sound, trash, vulgarity, anger, and personal space to name a few. Lots of things are, to use a word my wife and I throw around here, fraught. In a bizarre way I enjoy it I think. And that’s the point. I live how I do, where I do, for my own reasons. Looking back on my life I’d have to say I prefer walking uphill against the wind, but by myself; one way to be sure to win is to make up the rules to your own game and be the only one playing it.

If you’re reading this then something I write about here; city living, urban design, resilience, must strike a cord. You’re either living it, working with it, or wondering what it would be like to do so. If I have anything to offer it’s my lived experience in a single place that has been flailing about for the better part of four decades trying to deal with what it has meant to go from being a place which was perceived as valuable, and which valued itself, to a community suffering from a sort of collective PTSD. 

Other places have fallen further, but very few have fallen from such a high perch having been there for so long. The reason there are so many Springfields in the United States is because people founding town after town after town on the ever expanding frontier wanted to challenge their citizenry to be as strong and as successful as this one. Look in your Merriam-Webster dictionary (published in Springfield) and you’ll see that this Springfield was named after Springfield in England, the home of our founding father William Pynchon, and that all of the other Springfields were named after this one: Home of the River Gods. An inland settlement where energy and innovation created a prosperity nearly unrivaled in a small city in the New World from 1636 through the 19th century. And now we are a hiss and a byword. The newspaper of record was all excited this week because a new poll had a slight majority of the people living here calling it a good place to live. Neat. Half the people who live here think it doesn’t suck! And that’s an improvement!!

There is too much optimism in the back to the city movement just now in my opinion. I spent last night at a get together at the local farm I have an interest in just 7 miles from the Springfield city line. This was a gathering with people ranging in age from twenty-something to sexagenarian. There was talk of homes and farms, of foods and fun, and while I was pleased to hear that 5 separate Springfield restaurants were mentioned for having great food, no one, from Millennials to Baby Boomers gave even a passing mention to living in the city. Springfield “may” be rising a bit on the chart as a place to go to be entertained (and then to leave right away) and that is at the very least, a step in the right direction, but there was no hint that any of these prodded anyone towards a change of lifestyle. In essence, downtown Springfield is just the next new mall.

When people with the means to live more or less anywhere in metros like Springfield view the center city as one of the standard options, that’s when things will have changed. In my estimation that will only happen when it is thrust upon us as a society by circumstances beyond our control. Be that as it may, we are nowhere near that point now in most of the places which have been struggling since the end of World War II. Urban pioneers should know that the coffee shop that opened up across the street just a few months before they bought their condo…will probably close in a few months. The empty building down the street is as likely to become a vacant lot as a mixed use co-operative. Gentrification may be the least of your worries. Be ready for some real struggles. If you’re assuming that Scranton will be the next Brooklyn you’re probably going to be disappointed.

The clarion call of Urban Revival has been heard many times in my 40 years in this place. We turned mills into apartment buildings, made lofts from warehouses, opened restaurants in rusticated storefronts, and opened pop-up retail spaces in vacant a shops decades ago. We even built incrementally. But they didn’t come. 

By all means, move here, wherever your “here” is. I have no regrets in that regard. And sure, you can move in hoping you’ll be on the cutting edge of the next big thing. Just know that it might not happen. It is not inevitable in the near term. Be prepared to either make what your place is satisfactory and sufficient, or be prepared to move on in hopes of catching some other next big thing. If your happiness depends on others losing their taste for suburbia, be prepared to be disappointed, but if you can see the outlines of a fulfilling life in what cities like mine provide in the here and now then it can be extremely rewarding and, who knows, maybe next time the great inversion will be on for real!

It’s Magically Fallacious 

Posted on by

My youthful preference for cities was sociological and aesthetic with a soupçon of Club of Rome Limits to Growth. That was enough to make me fertile soil for Chuck Marohn’s message of the suburban Ponzi scheme in the Curbside Chat; sprawl didn’t pay for itself but traditional development did. With that a farm boy from Minnesota said to the entire world that the mightiest, wealthiest, most technologically advanced empire in all of history had feet of clay. The American Way of Life which was proclaimed “non-negotiable” was a chimera in more than one way: it was both illusory and monstrous. 

Was it hubristic to believe that a few dozen studies of post war auto-oriented design, a comparison of a taco joint to a block of mediocre buildings, and an anecdote about a small town being encouraged to double down on a waste water system it already couldn’t afford was sufficient to call out the American Dream? Not if you’re right. It’s amusing to listen to the humble Midwesterner project on to his own true believers the hubris he fears in his own message, even going so far as to call himself…I mean members of his own movement…”idiots” if they believe they know the solutions to the problems we face today.

Yes, I agree that our current situation is more of a predicament than a problem and that what we have before us are responses and not solutions. But I do know what we ought to do in the broadest sense, at least here in my corner of the world, facing the predicaments we are facing. And I am not an idiot. In greater Springfield we have a population growing at a snail’s pace and dozens of traditional, walkable city centers and neighborhoods which are underpopulated and underutilized. They already have the infrastructure to satisfy the needs of our citizenry for decades and decades without any more horizontal expansion.

Of course, not only do I know it, Chuck knows it too. To listen to him you’d almost believe that he doesn’t believe his own message here. But as he continuously carries on about “the magic of the incremental” it’s important to understand that he really doesn’t believe in the absolute hegemony of small scale developments, though perhaps he thinks he does. I can give 2 examples from this place (Western Massachusetts) of small scale, incremental plans that he would be four square against. 

1) Now that technology has replaced toll takers on the Massachusetts Turnpike there is a movement to add an exit and an entrance along the 30 mile stretch between Westfield and Lee. The cost wouldn’t amount to a blip in the Mass DOT’s budget, but it would open up hundreds of miles of roads and thousands of acres of greenfield to auto oriented development in a region, as I have already stated, with minimal population growth. 

2)The South End neighborhood is slowly, and incrementally in tiny chunks transforming from a traditional walkable neighborhood to a car centered place. One by one, hotels, car dealers, and fast food joints are purchasing traditional buildings, knocking them down, adding parking lots, and constructing buildings with stroad type set backs. The developers are making money, and unlike the Taco John’s model, the tax impact on the city has been positive, at least in the short run. 

Hey, these are small, incremental bets, but based on the auto oriented model. So you’re in favor of them, right Chuck? Or do you have the hubris to claim that you know better?! I know I know better…but that makes me an idiot, right? 

On the other hand we have MGM. A huge “silver bullet” project if ever there was one. But not all silver bullets are of the same caliber: The enormous highway viaduct separating the downtown from the river? Horrible! the enormous urban renewal district north of downtown? Disposable. But a half a dozen projects enumerated here? Spectacular. My city exists as it does because of the ultimate silver “bullet” project (quite literally) and preserved its regional preeminence by yet another.* Under the circumstances which go well beyond this one community’s ability to control (the legalization and proliferation of casino gambling for example), the city is leveraging this HUGE project to repair, restore, or redesign 3 downtown parks and miles of sidewalk and bicycle infrastructure; this mega project has shown a respect for the scale existing of the downtown and is designed to encourage walkability in a way that none of the small scale projects have over the last 30 years with the exception of those restricted by the demands of historic preservation.

*(A public-private partnership to build a bridge across the Connecticut to regain the regional pre-eminence lost to Northampton)

If you’re asking me, do I know the best way to communicate to my neighbors the critical nature of the decisions we are making regarding traditional versus auto oriented development? No, I don’t. Which plans in the short term will serve as the best exemplars of traditional development? “Tampoco”. But that is not the same as pretending I don’t know what the broader choices are and what the correct answers are. I do. 

I do get, though, that other parts of the world might be dealing with different issues and people might be positing ridiculous “solutions”: massive, brand new hugely expensive high speed rail projects connecting no place to nowhere in hopes that things will densify on either end. Here, though, we’re just taking already existing rights of way and infrastructure, and used rolling stock to double or triple connectivity to New Haven and New York City: Not high speed, not maglev, just some old trains adding 17, 12, and 2 trains a day at distances of 30, 60 and 100 miles respectively. 

To me, and probably to you, smart, small, and incremental. But to people who view rail as a relic it’s an ill conceived reversal, and a governmental white elephant; why not just a couple more lanes to Interstate 91? It’s incremental! “Use the rest of the $ saved not improving Springfield’s rail connectivity to fix the potholes on my street!?” 

We know better. You know better. THAT’S a stupid argument. To say so only demonstrates hubris if you’re wrong. And you’re not wrong.

As I’ve said before, Paris was a big idea, and it was a good one. Did Robert Moses draw inspiration from Haussmann? Probably. But Haussmann was right and Moses was wrong. Yes, smaller bets pose less risk than larger ones, and there are things we know, and things we don’t know. Of course knowing which is which is key. It is pretending the difference doesn’t matter or doesn’t exist that is idiotic.

Goodbye Seventies

Posted on by

The 70’s were a testament to the triumph of engineering over artistry. It’s not just that Main Street was ugly; parks were ugly for goodness sake. Even a child could see that decisions were being made expeditiously, and practically, but with no thought whatsoever given to aesthetics. Chain link fence was the order of the day. Giant chunks of concrete were used to block off overgrown pathways and benches were lower case h’s formed out of cement and irregular wooden slats: “There’s your god damn bench.” Even the signage in the park was of the reflective interstate highway variety.

A Pre War, a Post War, and a Post 1980 park building(2 and 3 are the old and new façades of the same building):

The schools too had become utilitarian. 

“Yes, these are the first public buildings which will give our children a message of how we view their importance and the importance of the journey on which they are about to embark. No. No embellishments. No decoration of any kind. The little shits can just walk through those metal doors and get their asses to class walking down these linoleum hallways.”
A pre war school:

It’s no wonder then that newly constructed commercial spaces took “form follows function” to a new levels of horrific inhuman ugliness. With the imprimatur of the avant garde banks, movie theaters, donut shops, gas stations, and grocery stores were given the green light to spread banality along every artery of the expanding corpus of post war development. The cars themselves stopped caring about how they looked then too. The only things pretending to artistry on a Chrysler or Chevrolet of the late 70’s was the name plate; if they could have made brutalist automobiles they would have I’m sure.
Pre War Branch Library and a Post War version:

In the 80’s something happened though; people started contemplating decoration again. Around that time there was an ad, I can’t remember what for, and some old, crotchety architect grumbled that he wouldn’t sink to putting pink pediments on his buildings until, under pressure to save the firm, he does. That about sums up the period from the late 80’s into the 90’s: Artistry, poor artistry, inferior artistry, grudging artistry, but artistry once again starts to appear in the public realm: schools get pseudo archways and almost recognizable pilasters, parks get faux tree trunk guard rails, cast iron benches, and human scale wooden signage.

In the public domain these gestures have turned into places and spaces with real gravitas now. You can see where architects have designed additions to libraries originally built in the “Here’s your fucking library” period of American architecture, and have hidden the horizontal middle finger with a building worthy of a community with self respect and dignity. Main Street is beautiful. The sidewalks are ornamented with brick and ceramic detailing. The lampposts are no longer indistinguishable from those on the interstate. Building facades, doorways, and windows meet the eye in pleasing ways.

The still visible portion of the 16 Acres Branch Library:

The spectacular addition to the 16 Acres Branch which mercifully covers up most of the original:

The key is that these efforts seem to be sincere. On Main Street. Out in Stroad World sincerity, as the saying goes, is the key; once you can fake that, you’ve got it made. Putting lipstick on a pig, and gilding a lily both would both be more integral to whatever one does with lilies and pigs than real architecture has to do with the automobile centered universe of the strip mall and the big box. It is a place where eating, shopping, and being entertained become inextricable from all other industrial processes. People are widgets to be moved around, spewed out, fed, sated, and returned to their dwelling units via the curb cut to “Blue Brook Acres”: The concrete, glass, polyvinyl, and gypsum board cubicles for human habitation surrounded by individually assigned and numbered asphalt strips for mobility prosthetics.

These are the real “self storage units”. Not homes in communities where people live their lives with others who feel affection for the built environment and the others who inhabit it, but rather industrially produced containers designed to seal in the individual until he or she is needed to provide functionality within the productive or consumptive matrix of the economy.

There’s affordable, and then there’s affordable

Posted on by

Yesterday my morning started, as weekends often do, with a little writing, some coffee, and then a conversation with my wife. Usually I bore her a bit with the topics which have sprung to mind as I write and then we turn to discussions of family, friends, finances, and our plans for the weekend. Yesterday Liz had an article from the New York Times she wanted to read for me; it was about Mt Kisco, New York. 

We know Mt Kisco particularly well since that is where LuLu often spends weekends with her dad. It’s a great little town with a lot of interesting shops, places to eat, a movie theater, and a much more diverse population than one might expect in Westchester County. The New York Times agrees:

Affordable? I am so out of touch. The couple highlighted in the piece managed to find a nice little home for $455,000. Affordable. Assuming a 20% down payment, meaning they had stashed away around $100,000 in free cash, they will only need to pay about $1,600 a month on the mortgage and say $700 a month in property taxes, add a few hundred for insurance, and that’s almost $3,000 as your ante. I get that Mt Kisco connects to the best job market in the United States via commuter rail and that the salary scale is beyond my ability to comprehend, but it just seems that everything in life would need to chug along almost perfectly for 30 years in order for this to turn out ok.

As a high school teacher I’ve got a pretty steady gig, and it wouldn’t surprise me if inflation were to diminish the purchasing power of my income over the next ten years. As unlikely as it is for me to lose my job, it’s not like there aren’t hundreds of jobs, even thousands, in my field that pay at least close to the amount I now make. The people finding Mt Kisco affordable must have jobs paying in the hundreds of thousands of dollars in jobs which require really specialized skill sets and whose existence depends on creating lots of real value in the market place month after month. I would think that those positions are few and far between and that finding a new one on the same salary scale if a position were lost would be quite a challenge.

I’m a mediocre person with mediocre financial needs and mediocre expectations. I kind of like that. At one point a few years ago students at my high school watched a series of people engaging in “extreme activities”; living life to the fullest. I remember offering that some people are drawn to that, and if that is your calling then, by all means, have at it. If, however, doing the equivalent of jumping from a moving van off a bridge in some sort of bungee related rapid descent thing wasn’t your style, not to sweat it; life can be pretty engaging and entertaining without skydiving or hang-gliding.

A different news item I came across during the week discussed how home buying overall was slowing, but not for Hispanics. The article went on to note that this was occurring despite the fact that many Hispanics live in areas with overheated and overpriced housing markets. Another dark cloud was the issue of immigration. Needless to say, neither the concern over high prices nor those regarding citizenship obtain around here. I wasn’t able to find specifics on Springfield in the piece, but a perusal of home purchases from just this week showed over half of the single family and multi family home purchases in the city were to people with Hispanic surnames. All of them were well under $200,000 and a few were less than half that amount. For most of these people the mortgage, property taxes, and insurance won’t add up to $1,000 a month. There aren’t a lot of jobs that won’t cover that. 

The abundance of high quality single and multi family homes at affordable prices will, I hope, give the city some stability and some resilience when the hard times do arrive. The bar is set pretty low here. Let’s hear it for humble aspirations, and limited expectations.

The Future Is Not Now

Posted on by

Definitions in the world of urbanism are amorphous at best. The word “city” itself is a very good example. We make judgements based on the population, economic output, crime, and numerous other things relative to the boundaries of a given city. These are the numerators, if you will. But these cities range in geographic size from areas of 10 square miles to almost 1,000. They can be as isolated from the next closest city as hundreds of miles, or they may border one or more other cities. In this sense we look at data which has been painstakingly compiled to give us as exact and precise a representation as can be achieved which we then use to compare to other communities whose “denominators” could not be more different making their use in comparison arithmetically pointless.

 I spent a few hours clicking through the Brookings Institute’s metro data and the newest census estimates for 2017 and that led me to wander through Wikipedia’s entries for various communities. I could see patterns developing within and between cities and metropolitan areas. Occasionally a data point would jump out at me: “Columbus has a population which is growing incredibly fast…for Ohio. Wait. It covers 200 square miles? Has it been annexing surrounding communities? It has. To gain access to Columbus’ water and sewer systems you must agree to be incorporated into the municipality.” If you just look at the raw data you’d think it was really bucking a trend; not so much.

The census data was sobering. After years of reading, granted from a self selected coterie of websites, that the trend toward suburbanization was over and that Millennials and Baby Boomers (Hey, that’s me!) were moving back to the cities the “we don’t have a dog in this fight” census numbers were showing a post 2007 crisis move back to even more suburbanization. I can hear the cheerleaders making excuses already: 

“Sure, suburban growth is outpacing urban growth again BUT, it’s no longer outgrowing it at as rapidly growing a rate as it was before!” 

“It’s not fair. Government regulators, bankers, and the developers all have their thumbs on the scale and so we can’t really see what people’s actual preferences are!”

My favorite one is that home values in urban areas are outpacing those in non urban ones. I have no doubt the numbers are correct, but it’s pretty easy to see how ridiculously hyperinflated values in a handful of enormous markets along with an epochal low in home values in urban areas generally makes this data meaningless for places like Springfield. From the very beginning of this blog I’ve made clear that this isn’t about just some generalized “urban living”, it’s about the places which have been struggling for survival for half a century. 

When the larger cities of Boston and New York started to pull out of their tailspin in the 1980’s I was among many who hoped that they were enormous canaries in the coal mine for smaller cities like Springfield. The change in Springfield’s skyline which took place in the 80’s, along with the construction of thousands of units of yuppie housing in the downtown were indicators that the private sector thought that the rebound was imminent. What is apparent in hindsight is that the back to the city movement, however organic in nature, was short circuited by centralization and mergers in the corporate sector. Looking at the four modernist Springfield scaled “skyscrapers” that dominate the horizon, three of which were built by financial entities headquartered in the city, not one of them is the headquarters of a bank or other financial institution today; in fact the City of Springfield does not have anything apart from a credit union headquartered here. Not a single bank headquarters where once there were at least half a dozen. 

The Dow of cities then, is a lot like the actual Dow Jones Average: it tells us a lot about a tiny sliver of the economy but it hides much more than it reveals.

Returning to the Brookings metro data for the northeast, it reveals some interesting things. As the narrative of the report suggests, those metro areas closest to Boston and New York City are starting to see spill over from the over-heated real estate markets of those two giant regions. Regions containing state capitals also have an employment base equivalent to a corporate headquarters or two which can provide stability. A city like Providence has proximity to Boston and a small state bureaucracy on its side, Syracuse has neither. That may very well explain a great deal more about their relative prosperity than the opening of a new coffee shop.

It’s fun to read and listen to enthusiasts who want to claim that this or that decision has made all the difference in creating, or not, prosperity in their urban neighborhoods when much larger processes are at work. A link from one of the aforementioned articles described a shortage of cities. I have no doubt that Manhattan would make do with a few square miles more of Manhattan, and San Francisco could double in size tomorrow fourth dimension-ally and it would not be nearly enough to slake the thirst for living in that city, but there are dozens of architecturally stunning, fine grained, walkable cities, with good bones and tremendous potential just rotting in the rain; because there is no demand for them. I’ve been told a dozen times that my townhouse would be worth a million dollars if it were in Boston. But it’s not in Boston. And that makes all the difference.

If there were really some general passion for urbanity it wouldn’t just be manifesting itself amidst all the usual suspects and expanding more or less only at their peripheries and in a few boutique neighborhoods in rapidly (once again) expanding areas in the Sun Belt and out west. I do believe that the future will be about walkable urbanism and local food production: traditional cities and productive farm land. But the future is not now. Given current realities, people want to live in McMansions in homogenous suburban communities, they want to live in hot climates without snow or even rain, and they want to commute 27 miles to work in an SUV on an 8 lane expressway. And they are going to continue to do so until they can’t. 

The irony, and perhaps even the paradox for me is that my community will suffer as long as the economy at large keeps moving forward at pace, or will prosper only relative to decline overall. Such is the fate of a natural born contrarian. I may not like it, but that doesn’t mean that I’m going to pretend that it isn’t true.

**********************************************************************************************

Some interesting visuals from the Brookings’ data (Dark Blue is best, Dark Red worst, gray is middling):

Metro Springfield is a slightly more prosperous than average metro, and metro areas, as opposed to smaller, or “micro” regions are generally much more prosperous making this area fairly well to do:

The metro does incredible well in terms of inclusion, being considered number TWO in the country by Brookings’ measurements from 2006-2016:

Growth here is slow, but better than most metros the region:

In terms of population Springfield (at the top) chugs along at a snail’s pace, but unlike similar places like Rochester or Syracuse (highlighted), it does continue to grow:

And these estimates are as of July 1, 2017. Given that Hamden County has taken in more María refugees than any county outside Florida:

I assume that the trend will not only continue, but may quicken slightly.

The 9th (or 10th) Commandment

Posted on by

I was the Community Liaison for the Armoury-Quadrangle Civic Association and we were engaged in an effort to beautify the neighborhood. I spent a lot of hours picking up trash in parks and on sidewalks and our executive board leveraged some services from the park department and the Business Improvement District to hang baskets of flowers and some newly designed banners. As we presented the idea for the banners to the group one person, that I can’t remember ever seeing before, objected strenuously; How could we justify wasting money in this way when children in the Springfield Public Schools were in need of things like books?! 

Leaving aside the fact that I was a parent representative on the School Centered Decision Making Team at the nearby elementary school and that the children there were not any more in need of books than any other children, the pot of money from which the banners and flowers were to come would not flow to “books for neighborhood kids” if we chose not to use it, but rather it would flow to some other neighborhood, perhaps in some other community, for their neighborhood beautification efforts. The commonwealth spends hundreds of millions on public education. I’m sure every school could use more funding, but I highly doubt the tiny fraction of public funding that accrues to neighborhood beautification in any way impacts school funding.

(At least two of the banners still flying)

Apart from just the “do-gooder-ishness” of the visitor’s commentary there is also a touch of the bias which shows itself, as Noam Chomsky describes it, as requiring a much higher level of morality for the poor than for the affluent: Rich neighborhoods can have hanging baskets of flowers and banners, but for poor neighborhoods it shows a wanton disregard for probity to squander funds on such trivialities! I would take it a step further; the rich can have their own private flower gardens in their own fenced in yards and hang ridiculous banners from their front porches representing whatever their banal obsessions might be, the poor have only the public space and often spend a great deal more time in it. Why not some flowers to beautify their walk to the dollar store and some banners to inform them that they do live in a place with people who have an identity and care about the public realm?

And here we scratch the surface another debate NOT raging at Strong Towns: the foolishness of spending money to attract tourists to older urban neighborhoods. “Stop wasting money on creating amenities for visitors and focus on your residents!” Except, I can’t think of an amenity for a visitor which couldn’t also enhance the life of a resident. When I worked at the Sheraton downtown, an amenity for visitors if ever there was one, that hotel gave me a job that I could walk to with hours that allowed me to go to school in the daytime and work on the evenings and weekends.

Yes, the newer fancy pedestrian enhancements here are designed for visitors to MGM, but my neighbors and I get to use them as well. More shows at Symphony Hall and the civic center will give visitors more entertainment options to choose from…and residents too! Is the problem that the poor shouldn’t go to shows or concerts, or is it a bad thing that people who aren’t poor might decide to move to the neighborhood because there is so much going on? Gentrification! Gentrification! To quote a headline from from the American Conservative (in an article republished at Strong Towns): Rust Belt Cities Need Investment, Not Gentrification Worries.

Halle-frickin-lujah. Can I get an “amen”?!

I’ll take it a step further. I often attend the symphony. I absolutely love it. Ditto the American Hockey League Springfield Thunderbirds. At both venues I guarantee that suburbanites make up the overwhelming majority of attendees. “Boo! Boo! You’re catering to the outsider, the person who just comes into the city to have their little ‘experience’ and then they run home to their white (emphasis on the white) picket fence!” 

Ok. Except, those are the suburbanites who care, at least a little bit, about the city. At least in my experience. Maybe they also hit up a restaurant or a bar in the city when they go to a concert or a game. Maybe they play a little pool at Smith’s Billiards too, or they have dinner at a friend’s house nearby. There is a difference between ignoring your residents’ needs and enhancing your city for visitors. I suppose it’s possible to do both at once, but I have actual experience in an urban neighborhood where, from my perspective, every enhancement for visitors has enhanced the area for residents.

Perhaps the greatest paradox of the lifestyle I have chosen is that, were I to magically inherit tens of millions or even hundreds of millions of dollars I would not want to leave my home, but most of my neighbors, if they were to come into a thousand would use it to leave. The irony is that money is not an obstacle to so many of the rich experiences I have here. Just yesterday my wife and I went to the annual flower show at the museums. We choose to be members in order to support the museums in what they do, but any Springfield resident can go to any of the museums for no charge as often as they choose. 

It really is a metaphor for the experience here; so much is accessible here for so little, but the people who perhaps need it most access it the least. Nothing helps one to appreciate what one possesses like seeing someone else experience and appreciate it. I’ve always thought that the only really valuable outcome for the emphasis we’ve placed on getting outsiders to value the assets we have here is that in so doing the people who live here might actually look up and realize the exact same thing for themselves.

This Is Part Two

Posted on by

You’ve probably noticed something of a trend in my recent essays. I’ve never had much patience for dogma. To me, flip-flopping, or in other words changing strategies when the old ones aren’t working, just makes sense. I’ve spent much of the last 40 years not just thinking about, but working towards improving what has become “my neighborhood”. I’ve planted trees, painted benches, picked up trash, participated in workshops, written letters, prepared reports, met with department heads, and today I serve on two city boards.

I know that my writing and the writings of others I’ve encouraged people to read about place making and building for people have influenced thought and made a difference in designs that were eventually executed, but I’ve also seen that local developers are the ones who hold the real power when it comes to small to medium sized developments. The problem with that is that the money over the last half a century has been made mostly in horizontal development, or what is commonly called “sprawl”, and the people who have become “successful local developers” see absolutely nothing wrong with what has become standard auto oriented design. For that reason, when called upon to do anything, even in a traditional downtown and despite the urging of planners and economic development officials, they demand excessive surface parking and pedestrian killing setbacks.

It is for that reason that the barrage of writing, especially at Strongtowns, of the one size fits all mentality that anything done at scale must be bad when my actual lived experience in this one medium sized rust belt (typologically if not geographically) city is that there are precisely two forms of economic development that preserve a walkable environment: historic rehabilitation, and mega-projects. Everything else turns Main Street into a stroad. Would that it were not so, but I have documented that fact here. Your community is much more enlightened and you have local developers building combination retail/commercial/residential structures built to the sidewalk with little to no surface parking? Bully for you, but I’m trying to preserve MY community under the terms of today’s power reality and I have a feeling that the same thing is true of a number of places.

You know what? The enormous MGM resort casino does pose a risk to what’s left of the fine grained urbanism of the downtown and the South End of Springfield, but that risk is really just that the decay and decline will proceed at an even faster pace than it has in the preceding 5 decades. On the other hand, how many orthodox incrementalists really would cast aside not only a project which in and of itself contained movie theaters, retail shops, and recreational activities long sought after in the core city, but which has also led to tens of millions of dollars in infrastructure maintenance both below ground and above including the complete restoration or rebuilding of three downtown parks?

And the repair of miles of downtown sidewalks including the addition, for the first time ever, of bicycle infrastructure?

And led to the further enhancement of yet another historic plaza and the rehabilitation of the grounds of a National Historic Site?

Of course, if you live in an already thriving urban oasis I can understand why you wouldn’t want all this in your back yard; turns out you’re a NIMBY after all! But if you live in any one of dozens of moldering traditional formerly industrial cities I bet you’d gladly embrace the whole idea; in private at least, all the while chiding the cheerleaders of the project as sell-outs! Honestly, Utica wouldn’t want this? Rochester wouldn’t take this deal if it were offered? Syracuse?

“All things in moderation”. Including moderation I’d say. Sometimes a little excess is what’s needed. In the long term the realities of energy, the environment, and demographics will determine if Springfield declines, thrives, or even survives. In the long term we’re all dead as well. 8 months from now my wife and I will be able to walk to a movie theater on a sidewalk that’s no longer crumbling into dust, or take LuLu ice skating on a brand new outdoor rink. A year from now the plaza connecting the Quadrangle museums to Main Street will be reopened for the first time in years with a new design that won’t promote public urination. Will this be the spark that ignites the fire of a long dormant city or will it be just another flash in the pan? I can’t say that I don’t care, but if the last 40 years have taught me anything it is that there are no guarantees. 
Sometimes you just have to say: “What the hell!”

Wrong Again

Posted on by

What do you call it if you feel schadenfreude for yourself? Suischadenfreude? 

Years ago I was reading on all of the usual platforms the celebration of the Great Inversion: America’s return to the city. I wrote a piece on how my anecdotal evidence showed no such transition; Millennials, my former students, were all posting pictures on Facebook of their new suburban homes, and one or two were even moving out of starter homes and into exurbic Mc “m’eh” nsions. The only one of hundreds of former students I could find doing an urban thing outside of the usual NYC, Boston, San Francisco types of cities was one kid with political ambitions fighting for social justice in Hartford …home residence unspecified.

Seeing an article from Governing magazine linked at Planetizen proclaiming that domestic migration from cities to suburbs was accelerating didn’t surprise me. I’m not sure if even the idea that even the most sprawling of larger metros were ex-urbanizing even more surprised me. What I did find funny was the fact that right above the link to this article was another link to a Guardian piece proclaiming Phoenix, Arizona THE WORLD’S MOST UNSUSTAINABLE CITY! 

Also the sprawlingest and fastest growing; see census estimates.

My “large urban county” lost population to domestic migration…which does NOT include Puerto Rico somehow…but saw a net gain of 700 people through international migration (which may include Puerto Rico, it’s not clear) and childbirth. It was incredibly interesting the other day to hear a young person discussing her family’s unwanted move to the Carolinas due to affordability issues. It wouldn’t have been appropriate for me to interject but I couldn’t help but think about all of the assumptions bound up in the conversation.

It begins, of course, with the idea that there are no affordable places to live in this region. The obvious assumption was that the only acceptable places to live in the region were the unaffordable ones. As someone sitting in a nearly 4,000 square foot Victorian purchased for $90,000 who pays less than $2,500 a year in property taxes who lives “in the region” I would dispute the idea that there are no affordable residency options, they just aren’t in the mostly white wealthy suburbs. Schools usually come up as part of the conversation, but I would argue with anyone trying to imply that schools in either North Carolina or South Carolina are superior to those in Massachusetts.

What that leaves is, if you want to live cheaply…with white people…in suburbia…then this area is unaffordable. I find it hard to sympathize with people who complain about how difficult it is to make ends meet when they’ve chosen to pay a premium of literally $30,000 to $40,000 a year for decades not to live in perfectly wonderful homes in nice traditional neighborhoods while sending their kids to school with brown people. So they leave exclaiming that Tax-a-chusetts has forced them to do so.

Back to the inverting of the inversion. I don’t see the the de-inversion of the Great Inversion re-inverting until circumstances give people no other choice; Maricopa County may be the world’s largest experimental die-off Petrie dish, but “ain’t nobody going nowheres” until the water runs out, the gas gets too expensive, and the AC gets shut off! And that brings me back to something of a motif of late; the ridiculous ignorance, or let’s call naïveté, of the young urbanists: “You know what will revitalize your down-on-its-luck Rust Belt downtown? A coffee shop!” Thanks Jane Jacobs. Wow. What an insight. 

If only we had thought of that before.

“Housing? Try bringing housing to your metro center! You know, cool lofts and stuff.”

Did it. 40 years ago. Lofts and exposed beams and brick walls.

“Meds, beds and eds?“





Yup. 30 years ago. Didn’t change anything.

The simple fact is that the success of all of these things is the effect, not the cause of resurgence. Coffee shops have been opening and closing all the while decline has been happening. Hell, in Springfield there are coffee shops that are still here which were here before the decline began. 

Springfield, Hartford, Bridgeport, New Haven, Syracuse, Albany, Rochester, Worcester, Providence, and Utica all didn’t experience decline while southern and western cities experienced growth because the former didn’t have coffee shops, or hotel rooms, or colleges and the latter did. Spain, England, Portugal, France and Holland didn’t beat Italy, Austria, and Turkey to the New World because they were better, faster, stronger, and had more coffee shops; looking at a map will give you some clues as to why. In the case of Spain, being first and best in the New World didn’t actually do them a lot of good in the long run, though it did make on of their languages hugely more significant than it would ever be in its own hemisphere.

My recent focus on reading and re-reading some texts on Springfield history only distances me further from the “magical coffee shop” believers. This city exists because it won a competition, knowingly or not, for one of the first “Amazon HQ2” type developments in the newly formed United States of America: The National Armory. Until that moment the city had lost ground and indeed even its regional pre-eminence to Northampton. It was the location of the Armory which brought artisans, craftsmen, industrialists, and financiers here which then lead to the still relatively resilient, vibrant, diversified economy the city enjoys today. 

The first American made car, motorcycle, vulcanized rubber tire, the invention of basketball, the headquarters of one of the world’s largest financial institutions, one of the world’s best water systems, our colleges, the incredible architecture of our libraries, city hall, and commercial structures all go back to one enormous gamble on one enormous industrial employer. Sure, a brief 150 years later the entity that started it all was to close up shop, but, it turns out, all of the cubs that lion had sired were mature and fully grown by then, and so we persist. Struggling? Yes. But still among the most affluent metro areas of the nation, still manufacturing products used around the world, still possessing a heritage that very few cities its size can match in terms of not just history, but architecture as well.

I doubt a coffee shop would have done all that.