Paul Krugman, Urbanist

Channeling his inner-Jim Kuntsler, Paul Krugman says rising oil prices spell big trouble for  suburbia:

To see what I’m talking about, consider where I am at the moment: in a pleasant, middle-class neighborhood consisting mainly of four- or five-story apartment buildings, with easy access to public transit and plenty of local shopping.

It’s the kind of neighborhood in which people don’t have to drive a lot, but it’s also a kind of neighborhood that barely exists in America, even in big metropolitan areas. Greater Atlanta has roughly the same population as Greater Berlin — but Berlin is a city of trains, buses and bikes, while Atlanta is a city of cars, cars and cars.

And in the face of rising oil prices, which have left many Americans stranded in suburbia — utterly dependent on their cars, yet having a hard time affording gas — it’s starting to look as if Berlin had the better idea.

Changing the geography of American metropolitan areas will be hard. For one thing, houses last a lot longer than cars ... Infrastructure is another problem. Public transit, in particular, faces a chicken-and-egg problem: it’s hard to justify transit systems unless there’s sufficient population density, yet it’s hard to persuade people to live in denser neighborhoods unless they come with the advantage of transit access ...

Still, if we’re heading for a prolonged era of scarce, expensive oil, Americans will face increasingly strong incentives to start living like Europeans — maybe not today, and maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of our lives.

Europeans still drive a lot even with way expensive fuel -  the highways are perpetually clogged, worse at times the in the US, around Europe's major cities.  Sure, the transit is better, people take the train and lots more ride bicycles than in the US.  The same can be said of Toronto.  But it's not fuel costs that are driving this, it's the time and networking costs.  Who's moving back to US super-star cities? Not the middle classes, rather it's the relatively affluent, who are choosing to trade-off space for time. That said, America's stretched out spatial structure is a dead-weight cost against future competitiveness especially compared with the relatively compact city-regions in other parts of the globe.  In the creative economy, it is density, velocity, and idea-generation - in tandem with fuel economy or even energy efficiency, which which will be the core of competitive advantage.

The question remains: How to avoid a super-segmented and sorted city, and how to provide affordable housing in light of these growing forces?

Comments

[Michael Wells]

How to avoid a super-segmented and sorted city, and how to provide affordable housing in light of these growing forces?

The first thing that comes to mind is federal funding of several of the things that have been starved since the 1980's -- affordable housing, mass transit to name a couple.

Second is to break down some of the zoning barriers from the last half of the 20th century -- put some of that affordable housing in middle-class neighborhoods, even though land is expensive. Require developers to include affordable housing in big projects. Encourage small businesses in residential neighborhoods. Encourage some rentals in single family neighborhoods and home ownership in rental neighborhoods.

Third is some creative thinking about transportation in those suburbs. They're built and won't go away in our lifetimes. Jitneys, flex-cars, small buses, bike lanes, light rail, etc.

Other ways to connect the suburbs to the cities -- in-city in-person meeting places for telecommuters (Starbucks is a start), I'm not sure what else.

[Whitney Gunderson]

It’s amazing much uproar $4 per gallon fuel is causing in the United States when the equivalent costs double or more in Europe. A little over a year ago, I visited family in Belgium. My uncle, who worked as a chiropractor, drove an average of two hours per day commuting to different clinics in small cities in the Netherlands for work. The company he worked for gave him a small car to drive, but fuel costs were on him. Originally from the United States, my uncle thought that people actually drove more in Europe. But generally, it’s tough to say for sure. And yes, grocery prices reflected the higher fuel costs accordingly.

A super-segmented and sorted city is the most productive (good - in terms of economics) and the most inclusive (bad - in terms of tolerance and diversity) at the same time. Perhaps this will eventually shake out to the affluent living in urban cores with the middle class living in urban outskirts and being closely connected to the city via short commutes or public transport. The service industry is forecast to grow tremendously in the next decade or two. A concentration of rich people in urban areas will be a good opportunity for the middle class, even if living smack in the middle of them is unattainable for the majority. I agree with Michael that public policy needs to adopt to provide affordable housing, but am not keeping my hopes up for this to happen.

[Peter Jones]

I just blogged the Times' piece on traveling a Toronto weekend on $500, and then linked to the same article - and then your blog when citing your name as our "new Jane Jacobs." We're also Toronto transplants, and my wife and I live and work in both TO and Dayton, Ohio where her projects include revitalizing arts participation in the Oregon Arts District. All quite CC influenced, and happening quickly there.

But transformation takes time as people wait things out before acting. To see how far our collective awareness has come, just follow (neighbour) Greg Greene's documentary End of Suburbia, which was roundly tossed off as Peak Oilism at the time of release, but is now representative of a commonly accepted situation.

Working from home is much more acceptable in Ohio's knowledge workforce now, and we work from 2 homes and spend the travel between them. Trains will take time to rebuild in the US, and even Canada needs to integrate them better across cities.

Toronto is already a dense, convivial city, if not quite Berlin in its transport. But can its massive suburban exo-structure create their own versions of vibrant city spirit?

[Michael Wells]

Krugman's Europe discussion is relevant to big city and suburban America, but Europe doesn't have the sheer mass of the U.S.. Malheur County, Oregon (population 31,000) is almost as large as Belgium. Germany is smaller than Montana.

The missing piece is rural America. With the gutting of Amtrak and near disappearance of Greyhound, people in the country are increasingly car dependent. I can fly from Portland to Orlando (3000 miles) cheaper than to Klamath Falls, Oregon (300 miles). The answer isn't city-type bus service, in fact I'm not sure what it is, but it needs to be solved if the country is going to truly be united.

Among the reasons young people leave small towns is that they're stuck. Most of the population decrease places on the birth/death map post have no transportation other than cars. Folks in these places drive pickups because they use them, and are left out of the discussions about Americans should have smaller cars.

[Whitney Gunderson]

Peter Jones brought up a good point that I have thought a lot about in the past few months: Right now, people seem to be in waiting mode. In the short-term, high fuel prices do not force people to undergo drastic changes in driving habits or lifestyle patterns. But I think that the collective outlook on driving and lifestyle is changing more right now than we think it is.

How is this "change" working? We are going through a housing market correction that I think will last until 2010. Plus, energy costs are at record highs, even with the rate of inflation factored in. The housing market and fuel prices have an indirect impact on each other - independantly they have huge impacts. What will we say about this in 2020? I am not sure suburban areas can have a vibrant city life independant of an urban area. But they are built, they are not going anywhere, and they will play a major role in housing the population boom that the United States is forecast to experience.

According to the flight prices Michael dug up, people in Portland have cheaper access to Orlando, Florida, which is 3,000 miles away, than to Klamath Falls, Oregon, which is 300 miles away. This highlights the ongoing discussion about the importance of place: rural, suburban, urban. Is Orlando more important to someone living in Portland than Klamath Falls? Rural areas are getting left out of the discussion which is nothing new. Nonetheless, rural policy plays a major role in the quality of our environment and the outlook of the United States as a whole.

[carl]

It will be interesting to see at what gasoline price point the American Way of Life does indeed become negotiable.

[Michael Wells]

Speaking of energy, there's an article on CNN about oilman T. Boone Pickens building the world’s largest wind farm in Texas.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/05/19/pickens.qa/index.html

Here’s the key quote: “You have a wind corridor that goes from Pampa, Texas, to the Canadian border.” Guess what, that’s the part of the country that’s emptying out, right up the middle. Could wind farming be the economic salvation of the heartland? Cleaner than coal, safer than nuclear.

[Wil]

The only real life example of a solution to suburban isolation that I personally know of is Walnut Creek, California. During the 1970s W.C. was a sleepy, distant, suburb of San Francisco.Over the years as the population grew, its little downtown began to grow, eventually sprouting a few mid-rise buildings. Today, the people who live in the area do not need to travel into the big city because they have their own fully developed downtown, with every amenity. The answer is, the creation of hub mini-cities that surround the core big city. One thing that east coast big city people have trouble understanding is that most Americans dislike density, and prefer their personal space at almost any cost. Like one of my professors, radical environmentalist, Sim Van Der Ryn, once said when being questioned about his own living arrangements after weeks of telling us how critically important density is, " I live on 3/4 aces in Marin because I need my green space".

Advances in technology will enable suburbia to continue in some manner. It may be helpful to think of McMansions as the ultimate live/work space for people with families. Suburbia just needs to be greener. Where we live in British Columbia , gas is already $1.41 per liter, or about $6.00 U.S. per gallon, and people manage to drive trucks and suvs.

[Farhan Lalji]

European cities have also started congestion charges for driving into town. And the highways are not the 8 line standards you see in the US and Canada but often 6 and 4 lane "highways". Biking is huge in Europe and Canada has nowhere near the levels of bike riding for commuting that you see in a city like London (where a large number of offices have showers and bike loans to encourage this).

[Michael Wells]

Walnut Creek also has BART light rail and a freeway directly into the City. Without these it would feel a lot more isolated. I have a daughter who lives there and they would rather be in SF but can't afford it. They go into SF for culture and Marin for nature.

[Brian]

"Advances in technology will enable suburbia to continue in some manner."

Wishing it does not make it so.

It is an issue of scale. Do any of the proposed technologies 'scale up' such that it would enable us to maintain the suburban status quo - i.e. running the entire interstate highway system, McMansions, etc.? In other words, can you run the interstate highway on electric cars and mulch? If not, then suburbia will not continue in its status quo form. I don't see how it isn't merely that simple.

[Whitney Gunderson]

For some reason, over the past few years, the American Way of Life has garnered a negative connotation. I never thought being an American was a bad thing. And I never thought the American lifestyle was somehow inferior to others. Bequeathing George W. Bush as President twice was a real shame, but he's a lame duck President with less than a year to go. We can't hate ourselves for the negative consequences that have arisen in the past few years as a result of the American Way of Life, but somehow, our condition currently is one of intense self-loathing.

Europeans seem to understand the recent American plight better than we do. When I travelled to Europe, many people asked where I was from. I smiled and said, "The U.S." Of course, the next question of was always, "Do you like Bush?" And I always said, "No, I hate him." The Europeans liked me and they did not dislike America, but they honestly thought that Bush "had no brain." With my background thoughts in mind, bear with me when I say that our perceptions of United States and how we live are changing for three reasons, I've mentioned two previously in this blog subject. One: The housing market correction. Two: Record high fuel prices. Three: The big election.

There seems to be a creative class blogosphere consensus that suburbs are going to end. Like, actually cease to exist. Like when you are playing a video game and someone you don't know comes in your house and rips the TV and video game power cords out of the outlet. A severe, traumatic, unresolved, permanent end. Forever. Well, this is just not going to happen to suburbs, and since I can't talk any sense into the people who say they believe it will happen, I am putting forth my very own pet psychological theory of America.

The President of the United States sets the tone for the country. It's a well known fact that George W. Bush liked to drink. He liked to drink so much that he thought of himself as an alcoholic, quite drinking and magically found Jesus. Norman Mailer would say that delving into a topic like this would be existential and exhaustive. I agree wholeheartedly, but it's worth having the conversation anyway. If George W. Bush is an alcoholic, and the President sets the tone for the country, then we have been living in an alcoholic family of 300 million people for eight years! Children of alcoholic families develop defense mechanisms; the desire to please and to distract themselves from destructive behavior. Since 2000, the United States has embarked in the Iraq War in an unprecedented fashion. There are parallels to Vietnam, but Iraq and Vietnam are two different animals. Plus, the economy tanked. Instead of bucking wildly against the quagmire Iraq has become, or against poor economic policy, the defense mechanisms of the United States have become enamoring ourselves with political correctness (Grey's Anatomy) and celebrity gossip (Paris Hilton, Ted Kennedy's brain tumor). Movies have come out about the Iraq War, but no one takes the time to watch them. "Lions for Lambs" and "Stop-Loss" were in a theater near me for a whole weekend, but "21" has been showing for over a month. What gives?

Instead of playing the role of 300 million children raised in an alcoholic family and blaming ourselves for all these problems, the United States has got to snap out of this dysfunctional, defensive, fatalistic mindset - and fast. The United States is not bad. I don't think we completely realize how the past eight years molded the current view we have of ourselves. But I do think this view is changing, and the stimulus for this change goes back to my aforementioned three reasons; the housing market correction, record high fuel prices and the big election. One: Getting the speculators out of the housing market so that housing values return to traditional levels of growth? Good move. Two: Record high fuel prices putting a strain on the middle class family budget? Short-term adjustments include driving less and getting higher fuel mileage, long-term adjustments include sustainable living arrangements and green energy. Three: The big election? It's just around the corner.

I get a kick out of watching Tim Russert interview Clinton, Obama and the other surrogates that have somehow attached themselves to our politics. It seems like Russert detaches himself from what all these people are saying. Russert asks the question, Russert gets an answer, Russert moves on. Instead of having a discussion, or asking an unscripted question, Russert just sticks to asking the questions. It's understandable. In all his years as a reporter, Tim Russert has never seen anything like Election 2008 before, and he chooses to detach instead of making an effort to think differently. Russert hasn't quite figured out how to handle it; how to step out of the grasp of a mindset that resembles alcoholism. I don't think that the rest of us have either.

[Eric O]

job growth + affordability + transit = a resilient city

...or...another way to look at it:

industries investing in downtown + mixed income core neighborhoods + transit oriented developments + attractive suburbs (many with new TND) = a resilient city

...That's the sweet spot Charlotte is in...Ya'll should come check us out!

[vzgyxe kolhdmt]

jfthimo rfba vcksl hazrqfk gqybmspi gxovmkpeq czsebo

[Michael R. Bernstein]

Regarding the 'Portland to Orlando cheaper than to Klamath Falls' problem, a solution may exist, but it is mostly in the southeast right now:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200805/dayjet

[Michael R. Bernstein]

Getting back to Richard's question: "The question remains: How to avoid a super-segmented and sorted city[...]?"

I don't think we can, actually. But maybe if the segmentation is pushed *further*, down to the individual block or building, affordable housing might end up wedged between more desirable segments, and the city as a whole would end up with different segments interleaved even though whole buildings are given over to 'childless middleaged doctors', or 'twentysomething retail salespeople'.

We also know that, due to intra-urban mobility and even fashion, segments tend to drift around a bit, so cities can encourage this sort of turnover and accelerate it such that there is always a now-affordable/unfashionable block (or building) to move to when yours is becoming gentrified.

In a city where this sort of churn is typical, tools like http://everyblock.com start to become very valuable as community infrastructure.

[Eric O]

Hey Michael I like your train of thought... Have you considered the other tact? Why not use those pawn shops? Maybe invent an everyblock for the homeless. Degentrify every once in a while. Get funky. Create strategic real estate cycles. I call it "dirty urbanism". :)

[Whitney Gunderson]

Well, I see my pet psychological theory of America didn't catch on. Another sign of dysfunction is an unwillingness to talk about it. Denial is not just another river in Africa!