Another factor is that states and federal governments often provide the majority of the funding for new infrastructure projects but usually leave the local municipalities responsible for the maintenance and eventual replacement. So all of these shiny new suburbs are benefiting from new interchanges, new stroads, and sometimes new water and sewer lines that they didn't pay for locally. Meanwhile older cities are now facing huge bills to replace old crumbing sewer systems, replace obsolete highway interchanges, etc. Most suburbs don't even bother maintaining their infrastructure, they just decline over time. So a new "nice" suburb gets built somewhere else and all the rich people move there, while the older suburbs slowly transition from upper/middle class to the new cheap place to live.

 

Cities also pay for things like social services, public transportation, museums and zoos. So in many cases, the suburbs benefit from those things but don't pay into them, leaving the cities with the bill.

France's plan to reverse sprawl in 200 small cities https://t.co/hnZDmkFfgL

France's plan to reverse sprawl in 200 small cities https://t.co/hnZDmkFfgL

 

Wouldn't it be great if the "Infrastructure President" came up with something like this?

France's plan to reverse sprawl in 200 small cities https://t.co/hnZDmkFfgL

 

Wouldn't it be great if the "Infrastructure President" came up with something like this?

 

Americans are never going to give up "sprawl" on a large scale basis. 

 

You might be able to come up with a politically palatable way to quit subsidizing it and that might reduce the scale.  Especially as the population ages.  You guys should probably focus on that.

 

But it's compatable with our national character to a degree that any attempt to "reverse" it on a significant scale would result in a massive political backlash.

 

Especially with a President who is a follower not a leader.

 

trump isnt a follower any more than your typically adhd kid is who can focus on something for a micro moment. he’s just erratic. of course that was part of his appeal. he probably wont have much effect on this topic. our extensive and cheap land is far and away the culprit. its easy to underestimate how big and empty the country is.

France's plan to reverse sprawl in 200 small cities https://t.co/hnZDmkFfgL

 

Wouldn't it be great if the "Infrastructure President" came up with something like this?

 

Americans are never going to give up "sprawl" on a large scale basis. 

 

You might be able to come up with a politically palatable way to quit subsidizing it and that might reduce the scale.  Especially as the population ages.  You guys should probably focus on that.

 

But it's compatable with our national character to a degree that any attempt to "reverse" it on a significant scale would result in a massive political backlash.

 

Especially with a President who is a follower not a leader.

 

They will if they can't afford it. The lower the density, the higher the per unit cost of public services and transportation.

France's plan to reverse sprawl in 200 small cities https://t.co/hnZDmkFfgL

 

Wouldn't it be great if the "Infrastructure President" came up with something like this?

 

Americans are never going to give up "sprawl" on a large scale basis. 

 

You might be able to come up with a politically palatable way to quit subsidizing it and that might reduce the scale.  Especially as the population ages.  You guys should probably focus on that.

 

But it's compatable with our national character to a degree that any attempt to "reverse" it on a significant scale would result in a massive political backlash.

 

Especially with a President who is a follower not a leader.

 

They will if they can't afford it. The lower the density, the higher the per unit cost of public services and transportation.

 

Good luck trying to convince those people way out in the exurbs that they are actually a drag on state and local finances, rather than those "welfare leeches" in the city. 

Townships with thousands of acres of low-density sprawl will start running into money problems when the development stops. In the Philadelphia area townships that have always been primarily suburban sprawl bedroom communities have in the past several years tried to attract more mixed-use and commercial development to shore up their finances and many have faced push back from NIMBYs who don't want to see any kind of density.

Redirected from another thread.....

 

What is happening in reality with rural young people moving to Ohio's largest cities and what the rural, ideologically driven legislature wants to happen are two different things. I think we're all familiar how Ohio's rural and exurban lawmakers view Ohio's cities with disdain for some pretty awful reasons. They would rather have their children stay in the rural areas of Ohio. They're not. A simple drive through small-town Ohio will reveal the blood-letting that's happened there.

 

Something similar happened during World War II.  My grandfather was part of it.

 

That was a big part of how suburbs happened.

 

There was a housing shortage in cities and populations spread outward with the assistance of government programs like the GI Bill and highway construction. It was an opportunity for the likes of GM and Shell oil to fulfill their visions of the future of American cities they had espoused before WWII to sell more of their products, facilitated through massive government subsidies that externalized the cost of suburbanization to make it seem artificially cheap. The government subsidization of suburbia was institutionalized and remains commonplace today, protected by the corporate welfare state.

"Suburban cocoons make cocoon citizens, who define the common good as that which benefits those inside their particular cocoon."

—William Fulton @BillFultonVta

 

Ohio GOPers sure do hate Ohio cities and home rule. Or maybe they think that hurting them further will turn Ohio cities from Democratic to Republican?? This is exactly what the Michigan legislature did and it screwed Detroit badly. The suburbs should start their own water supply operation.

 

Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson warns that Statehouse proposal on water rates would hurt region's poorest residents

Updated 2:36 PM; Posted 2:30 PM

By Robert Higgs, cleveland.com bhiggsCleveland[/member].com

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio - Mayor Frank Jackson warns in a letter to statehouse leaders that legislation targeting water rates charged to suburban customers could punish the Cleveland area's poorest residents with higher bills.

 

Jackson, who oversees the nation's ninth largest water system, also warned that House Bill 602 would promote urban sprawl by lowering the water bills in distant suburbs.

 

"The increases that would result from the passage of H.B. 602 would disproportionately impact may of our most economically vulnerable residents --- many of whom are concentrated within the municipal boundaries of the city of Cleveland and many of our inner ring suburbs," Jackson wrote to House Speaker Ryan Smith and Senate President Larry Obhof.

 

MORE:

https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/index.ssf/2018/06/cleveland_mayor_frank_jackson_61.html

How sprawl makes walkable places less affordable

Every American city has a suburban albatross around its neck.

https://medium.com/@NewUrbanism/how-sprawl-makes-walkable-places-less-affordable-4bfeaebb94d

 

Another sprawl article.....

 

“Research has been piling up establishing a link between the spread of #sprawl & the rise of obesity in our country"

https://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/well/2013/10/28/commutings-hidden-cost/?referer=http://t.co/xdzmfeahOl

https://www.cleveland.com/hillcrest/index.ssf/2018/07/richmond_heights_62.html#incart_river_index

 

Very interesting news.  An out-of-state developer is talking about sinking close to $70M into mixed use development at Richmond Town Square, a newly dead mall about 2 miles north of Beachwood Place and Legacy Village.  (Quick background:  RTS lost its three department store anchors in Macy's, Sears, and JC Penney's in 2015, winter 2017, and spring 2017, respectively.  A 20-screen movie theater and Plant Fitness remain as junior anchors along with a struggling food court and some local stores).

 

The proposal here is to demolish the Sears building on the northwest portion of the property and replace it with a 4-story class A apartment building, a 4-story hotel (!), and a 2-story, 10K sf retail building.  The developer already purchased the empty Macy's building last year for $2M is investing an additional $8M to convert it into a Cube Smart self-storage facility (ugh).

 

All in all, a pretty ambitious plan, and its mixed-use potential would be great for the city of Richmond Heights.  The hotel seems like a long shot, as the mall lacks freeway access and there are no particular entities nearby that attract tourists.  The Cuyahoga County airport is a mile north and a straight shot away, so maybe that's what they're hoping for.  The airport is currently undergoing a runway expansion.

In study of 66 global cities by @NYUMarron @landpolicy, #Cleveland stands out. Its footprint expanded significantly over past 25 yrs while density fell 41%. Surprise to no one but crazy to see comparisons...described here as having lax land use controls.

 

25 Years of Urban Growth and Density Change in 66 Global Cities

https://www.vividmaps.com/2018/08/25-years-urban-growth-density-change-66-global-cities.html

 

-Emily Garr Pacetti, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland

Impressive that LA really has not sprawled that much in the last 25 years

^It can't, it's hit up against all the mountain ranges.  Gotta start growing up rather than growing out. 

So, are they saying that Lorain and Elyria [edit- and Painesville] weren't urbanized 25 years ago, or am I missing something?

Pretty cool graphic representations of the cities' physical growth, but average density wasn't the best metric to use. Completely conceals changes in the distribution of population within "urbanized" areas.

So, are they saying that Lorain and Elyria [edit- and Painesville] weren't urbanized 25 years ago, or am I missing something?

 

Digging into the raw data, it seems highly suspect. You can see how the area's land is coded here: http://www.atlasofurbanexpansion.org/cities/view/Cleveland

Yeah, I don't really understand their system- by which I mean it's clearly a mess if you dig into it with any actual knowledge of a particular place.  Sure the basic idea that Cleveland has had no-growth sprawl over the last 25 years is true, but I wouldn't put any faith in the numbers they are presenting.

COMMENTARY: Looking to the future of transportation

IDEAS-VOICES By Mark Donaghy

Posted: 12:00 a.m. Monday, September 24, 2018

 

A recent column on this page discussed traffic congestion and how it happens. In my opinion, traffic congestion in our nation’s urban areas is a classic byproduct of sprawl and our reluctance to regionally manage growth as it relates to the use of land.

 

Dayton is a prime example of this phenomenon, as over the past 40 to 60 years we have consumed enormous amounts of land in nearly all directions while the population has remained essentially flat. We all want the freedom to live where we want, with all the supporting infrastructure necessary for our convenience — including more space on the roadways.

 

We have created a society where most kids can’t walk to school because there is no direct path from subdivisions of cul-de-sacs to the school campus, so we invest in school busing operations that compete with family cars in the daily congestion around our K-12 campuses. Today we have growing infrastructure needs from utilities and public safety investments to freeways and those additional capacity lanes that typically are quickly filled (Austin Boulevard and Ohio 741, for example) as a result of induced demand. And of course, we want our taxes to be low!

 

MORE:

https://www.mydaytondailynews.com/news/opinion/commentary-looking-the-future-transportation/ZH0hSghLw8UFQNeenwpyOK/

Redirected from another thread....

 

 

Rural people moving to big cities was a big part of how suburbia happened.

 

You mean southern rural black people moving to northern cities and whites, many of them racists, moving to suburbs? Before the Great Depression and the New Deal, rural white folks came to the big cities because private enterprise wasn't building in rural areas transportation, electric utilities and other modern amenities that gave city residents a higher quality of life than rural folk. It wasn't until the New Deal and its massive government intervention in the free market brought the comforts of city life to many rural areas.

 

On 10/3/2018 at 9:02 PM, KJP said:

Redirected from another thread....

 

 

 

You mean southern rural black people moving to northern cities and whites, many of them racists, moving to suburbs? Before the Great Depression and the New Deal, rural white folks came to the big cities because private enterprise wasn't building in rural areas transportation, electric utilities and other modern amenities that gave city residents a higher quality of life than rural folk. It wasn't until the New Deal and its massive government intervention in the free market brought the comforts of city life to many rural areas.

 

I'm referring specifically to rural people who moved to cities to work in war related industries during World War II.   Many times it was just the younger men, while women and older men stayed home and raised the kids.   After the war ended, the younger men decided they wanted to keep those jobs and moved their families to the cities.   But they didn't wish to move into dense neighborhoods.   Suburbs provided, or began as, a hybrid of urban and rural.

Also a lot of cities looked like this at the time:

 

https://www.citylab.com/design/2012/06/what-pittsburgh-looked-when-it-decided-it-had-pollution-problem/2185/

 

 

2 hours ago, E Rocc said:

 

I'm referring specifically to rural people who moved to cities to work in war related industries during World War II.   Many times it was just the younger men, while women and older men stayed home and raised the kids.   After the war ended, the younger men decided they wanted to keep those jobs and moved their families to the cities.   But they didn't wish to move into dense neighborhoods.   Suburbs provided, or began as, a hybrid of urban and rural.

 

They couldn't move to the cities if they wanted to. Read about the postwar housing shortages and how the government provided financial assistance to help people buy or build new homes. That's what created the suburbs and that financial assistance became institutionalized, creating new communities after older ones wore out since we prefer to spend tax dollars on replacing communities rather than rebuilding them.

If sprawl was really that "natural" then Canada would look just like the U.S.

14 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

If sprawl was really that "natural" then Canada would look just like the U.S.

 

"White flight" was the genesis of sprawl, but Canada was whiter than the US.

 

https://www.planetizen.com/news/2018/10/100960-why-canadian-cities-avoided-detroits-fate

"Most" Canadian cities also didn't ram freeway systems directly through their city centers. 

And Canadians aren't as militaristic when it comes to individual property rights, so things like urban growth boundaries and regionalization were more acceptable in Canada than here. But that shouldn't be considered a general statement. Some cities were more successful with UGBs than others. Hamilton and Windsor were not. London and Toronto tended to be more successful with them. Kitchener-Waterloo was mixed. Look at a satellite map of a Canadian metro area, and at how development occurs on one side of a principal street but not on the other. That's a UGB at work. Or, in London, the regional government is prohibiting further office developments in the suburbs and requiring them to be only in downtown London. Could you imagine an Ohio county or the State of Ohio doing something like that and not get sued?

Edited October 11, 20186 yr by KJP

On 10/10/2018 at 10:48 PM, GCrites80s said:

If sprawl was really that "natural" then Canada would look just like the U.S.

 

Lower population and a different mindset.   Canadians asked nicely for their independence.   We took ours.   Mindsets are inherited.

On 10/11/2018 at 3:52 PM, KJP said:

And Canadians aren't as militaristic when it comes to individual property rights, so things like urban growth boundaries and regionalization were more acceptable in Canada than here. But that shouldn't be considered a general statement. Some cities were more successful with UGBs than others. Hamilton and Windsor were not. London and Toronto tended to be more successful with them. Kitchener-Waterloo was mixed. Look at a satellite map of a Canadian metro area, and at how development occurs on one side of a principal street but not on the other. That's a UGB at work. Or, in London, the regional government is prohibiting further office developments in the suburbs and requiring them to be only in downtown London. Could you imagine an Ohio county or the State of Ohio doing something like that and not get sued?

 

Sued?   The state would never in a million years do it, nor would they let a county.

 

The suburbs are split between the major parties and that gives them clout beyond their numbers in Columbus.

 

You're 200% correct about the national character,  though you could easily have left out the word "property".

On 10/10/2018 at 9:50 PM, KJP said:

 

They couldn't move to the cities if they wanted to. Read about the postwar housing shortages and how the government provided financial assistance to help people buy or build new homes. That's what created the suburbs and that financial assistance became institutionalized, creating new communities after older ones wore out since we prefer to spend tax dollars on replacing communities rather than rebuilding them.

 

 For the most part, they didn't want to.   They wanted what they considered the best of both words, which for my grandpa was the current site of Fun N' Stuff in Macedonia.  

 

The World War II veterans had had their fill of "density" as well.

 

Eventually it became a cultural trend, and a perfect storm of sorts.

That special font barely shows up in dark theme.

1 hour ago, E Rocc said:

 

 For the most part, they didn't want to.   They wanted what they considered the best of both words, which for my grandpa was the current site of Fun N' Stuff in Macedonia.  

 

The World War II veterans had had their fill of "density" as well.

 

Eventually it became a cultural trend, and a perfect storm of sorts.

 

Of course, because they weren't paying full price for living in the suburbs.  I'd pick the Cadillac too if I didn't have to pay full price for it. While the suburbs got state and federal funds for new roads and market-rate housing, the mother cities and their transit systems, roads/bridges, and housing programs had to fend for themselves. Oh, and the Great Migration was just starting. Conservatives say "let the free market determine things" except when it benefits them. The free market did build cities once upon a time. It did it before the New Deal, and it built them with walkable density, electricity and public transportation.

Edited October 14, 20186 yr by KJP

1 hour ago, E Rocc said:

 

Lower population and a different mindset.   Canadians asked nicely for their independence.   We took ours.   Mindsets are inherited.

 

People all over the world are the same. It is government and religion that make them different. 

1 hour ago, E Rocc said:

The World War II veterans had had their fill of "density" as well.

 

A lot of that in Cleveland and similar places was due to the fact that industrial cities were disgusting to live in. We can have density today in a much cleaner and more sanitary way, which is why cities are coming back, starting with the coasts 20 years ago and now finally creeping into our corner of the world.

Edited October 14, 20186 yr by mu2010

6 hours ago, mu2010 said:

 

A lot of that in Cleveland and similar places was due to the fact that industrial cities were disgusting to live in. We can have density today in a much cleaner and more sanitary way, which is why cities are coming back, starting with the coasts 20 years ago and now finally creeping into our corner of the world.

My parents are both still around (at ages 90 and 85) and they remember Cbus as crowded and dirty in the mid to late 40's. Part of that is nearly 20 years of deferred maintenance from the depression (lack of money) and the war (lack of materials and manpower).  There was a housing shortage, and it was cheapest and easiest to build new housing in new areas-even before the interstate highway system a lot of Levittown type and other suburban developments were built. People back than generally could not wait to get away from public transportation and get private cars and move away from the central city even before racial desegregation became an issue for many.

Not everyone was trying to run away from public transportation. In the 1990s, in preparation for running a series on Old Cleveland, the local PBS station did a survey of the things that older Clevelanders missed the most about the Cleveland of their youth. One of the four things they missed the most was the streetcars. Cleveland also built the first new rail transit in the USA in the postwar years.

 

Edited October 15, 20186 yr by KJP

23 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

 

People all over the world are the same. It is government and religion that make them different. 

 

Not in the least, in fact it it's more likely that it's their differences that drive the differences in those.

 

Geography and migration are more likely to cause differences.   Migration indeed may cause positive feedback on differences.

 

Does it make sense that people uncomfortable with a certain condition are likely to move somewhere it is less prevalent, or not a concern at all?

23 hours ago, mu2010 said:

 

A lot of that in Cleveland and similar places was due to the fact that industrial cities were disgusting to live in. We can have density today in a much cleaner and more sanitary way, which is why cities are coming back, starting with the coasts 20 years ago and now finally creeping into our corner of the world.

 

True to a point, but the World War II veterans were also tired of life in barracks and on ships. They also had construction skills, and needed jobs.

5 hours ago, KJP said:

Not everyone was trying to run away from public transportation. In the 1990s, in preparation for running a series on Old Cleveland, the local PBS station did a survey of the things that older Clevelanders missed the most about the Cleveland of their youth. One of the four things they missed the most was the streetcars. Cleveland also built the first new rail transit in the USA in the postwar years.

 

 

Truth.   It would be better to say they were getting away from a dependence on public transportation.

 

Maple Heights was one of the first of the sprawlburbs.  Yet before the RTA takeover, the typical MH resident likely had better access to public transportation than most Clevelanders.   The point was it was not an essential.   

And now to settle the city-suburb-exurb debate once and for all: we're all right and we're all wrong!

 

Edited October 15, 20186 yr by KJP

Why cant Akron start trying to fit in, already...

How Suburban Infrastructure Got More Expensive Over Time

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/2/5/suburban-infrastructure-over-time

11 minutes ago, KJP said:

How Suburban Infrastructure Got More Expensive Over Time

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/2/5/suburban-infrastructure-over-time

 

It's a good article, I highly recommend it.  The author is super knowledgeable. ?

Edited February 8, 20196 yr by jjakucyk

 

The goal of the study was to measure the resurgence of cities vs their suburbs, which has been much discussed over the last decade or so, so it compares 1970 to 2010 data.  OK.

1 hour ago, KJP said:

 

 

They may have taken too long of a time period in order to prove a point.   I'd guess that difference was most distinct between 1970 and 1985 or so, then  almost as strong into the mid 90s.   It continues over the last 25 years or so, but not as strongly.   Policies which were anti-urban in effect (though not always intent) implemented during the late 60s and  70s exacerbated the "perfect storm" that was postwar residential sprawl.

 

Culture and education are the root of the differences moving forwards.