Janne’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  The Logistics Against New Urbanism

  I'm an environmental scientist working in the civil engineering industry and I've been interested to see how economics and local regulation affect development patterns, at least on the regional level.  There are several practical reasons I've observed that drive suburban growth rather than "new urbanism".  The end result of sprawl is not be what
  most people would choose in an ideal world, but it is a product of people doing what makes sense for themselves.

  1.  Municipal codes.  These prevent urban residential areas on many levels due to engineering requirements.  Civil engineering is more the process of meeting codes than being creative simply because meeting the codes is a task in itself.  This can be in the form of limitations on maximum building heights, maximum residential units per acre, minimum street widths, parking requirements, or limitations on use to industrial or commercial that undervalues what the land would go for in an open market.  Municipalities on the fringes of suburbia are generally more thirsty for new revenue, see a bigger % increase in revenue from new development, and are more like-minded in getting it because their council members live in suburbia themselves.

  2.  Re-Development costs.  It can cost a lot less to buy a parcel on the fringe of development and install new utilities (which are 1/3 of the finished lot price)than to dig up old utilities and pay throw-away costs for any old structures onsite.  It is also generally more straightforward to build on new land unless it is in an environmentally sensitive area.  For redevelop that increases concentration, if there is any pollution present say, on an old industrial site, the purchaser can be liable for cleanup costs.  Overall, to change zoning to increase density in a large city can be very expensive, it can take a long time, and it carries no guarantees.  

  3.  Organization and cooperation.  Most developers cannot afford to buy enough land to plan an entire "new urban" village themselves.  Cities or suburbs either are not funded to do that level of planning or don't have the code in place to encourage it.  Even if the developer wants to concentrate their lot sizes (which would maximize their profits)they can't be assured that the mixed use areas will arise on their own because what the other area land owners will do is out of their control.

  4.  The nature of sprawl.  Once sprawl is surrounding the urban area that you want to live in your options become less.  Either you can build an entire village on the outskirts on unused land, which requires an extremely large developer (Issaquah Highlands outside of Seattle is a moderate example of this) or you need to demolish and re-plumb the existing housing that was the outskirts of sprawl 40-50 years ago.  Either option requires big financing to get started and makes the end product much more costly per square foot due to throw-away costs (and more costly the closer you are to the center of the city).  

  5.  Trend towards bigger corporations and less small business.  This in not always true but a few corporate offices on the outskirts of a city can provide a lot of incentive for their employees to move into less dense areas.  It brings a lot of tax base to a city and simultaneously allows them to strong-arm the city because of their dependence on that new revenue to maintain their new infrastructure.  If your job is with a corporation on the outskirts of a city you then can choose either between reverse commuting and renting a smaller place in the city or buying a bigger place in the suburbs, driving less, and gaining equity in your home.  As long as jobs are moving into the suburbs people will also follow.

  That's just what I've observed on the practical level of what motivates the individual stakeholders involved.  The automobile is certainly the primary enabler for the suburban lifestyle, as is people's concerns about where they want to raise their children.  My belief is that developers want to pack in as many units as they can sell onto the land that they own. They can be pro-density but they are limited by limits on density and the costs to re-develop.  It is generally municipal code and people's personal preference to own more house (versus rent small) that drives sprawl.  Perhaps as the younger generations, who thrive more on social interactions, grow up and gain equity we'll see a shift towards more compact mixed use scenarios.On Why isn't there more new urbanism? posted 3 years, 8 months ago 28 Responses