- Home
- News Grid
- Local News
- Green Hawk
- Politics
- School Zone
- Youth Camps
- Nonprofits
- Missing Pets
- Multimedia
- Arts
- Movies
- Outdoors
- Sports
- News Releases
- Columnists
- Blogs
- Opinions
- Classifieds
- Advertise
- Donate
- Partners
Froma Harrop: The Urban Future Isn’t All About Population Booms
Sunbelt-and-sprawl advocate Joel Kotkin wrote two years ago that the future of American urbanism wasn’t in the “elite cities,” such as New York, Boston, Los Angeles and San Francisco, but in “younger, more affordable and less self-regarding places.” He named (his order) Houston, Charlotte, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Dallas and Riverside, Calif.
Boom-city boosters such as Kotkin play a numbers game, where the place with the biggest population explosion wins. This is also a kind of Blue America-vs.-Red America urbanology, which includes an element of liberal-bashing: Any place that refuses to be steamrolled by developers is called “elite.”
In the aftermath of the real-estate bust, areas overly dependent on building houses, selling houses and financing houses are in the worst shape. Economies need nonbubble jobs. Unemployment rates in the recent hyper-growth centers, Riverside and Las Vegas, are now well above those in the aforementioned “elite cities.” And Boston’s 9 percent unemployment is only a point above that of the more economically diverse Sunbelt powerhouses of Houston, Dallas and Phoenix.
There’s little point in pitting cities, regions and states against one another. This is a big country. One can like San Francisco for some things and Las Vegas for others. By the way, what gave anyone the idea that Houston, Dallas and Phoenix are not “self-regarding”? They are, as well they should be.
And whereas Texas is still a largely conservative state, Houston and Dallas are fairly progressive cities. Dallas now has a nifty light-rail system, and Houston just elected a lesbian mayor.
One other thing: The older coastal cities tend to be hemmed in by water on one or more sides. Their housing is expensive because they don’t have much land left to build on. To blame just their zoning laws is simpleminded.
This conversation has left out the “youth magnets,” the liberal cities that draw armies of educated young people by virtue — not in spite — of their protected environments and urban cool. We speak of places such as Seattle, Austin, Texas, and Portland, Ore. Migrants to these cities are not necessarily looking for cheap homes with three-car garages. They’re living in walk-ups and sharing apartments and lofts. Bike paths and public transportation are attractions.
Las Vegas has suffered the double-whammy of the real-estate bust and drop-off in tourism, the city’s main economic engine. Tourism has declined 6 percent from last year, and convention business is down a third. Luxury hotel rooms are approaching “roadside motel prices,” as Business Week put it.
Kotkin is right about one thing: Las Vegas is certainly affordable. House prices there have fallen 55 percent since peaking in August 2006.
Las Vegas, as well as that other boom country, Florida, now have gigantic new condo towers with only a handful of occupants. (Real estate professionals call these “see-through buildings” because they are so empty, there’s nothing to stop you from seeing from one side to the other.)
Last year, populations actually fell in Florida and in Clark County, Nev., which is mostly Las Vegas. Florida’s is the first loss in more than a century, other than during world wars.
These parts of the country will rise again. They have warm weather and fun cultures. But they need more varied sources of jobs. And Florida, especially, must tighten its zoning laws — the lack of which helped create the congestion that has begun to scare newcomers away.
It makes sense that more urban growth will happen outside the older, already crowded metropolises. But let’s drop the childish notion that if Houston is growing, San Francisco, a coastal city with a more stable population, must somehow be declining. There’s more to happiness than the census count reveals.
— Froma Harrop is an independent voice on politics, economics and culture, and blogs on RealClearPolitics.com. She is also a member of the editorial board at The Providence (R.I.) Journal. Click here to contact her at Creators.com.
Comments
Noozhawk's comments are moderated, but by posting here you accept your responsibility to follow our rules.
- No abusive, defamatory or libelous attacks. In plain English: No personal attacks.
- No vulgar or discriminatory language.
- If you do not follow these rules, don't be surprised if your comment is removed.
- Please use the Report Abuse button on offensive comments.
- Share what you know, ask about what you don't. Give us your eyewitness accounts, observations, background and history. Tell us what else you want to know about the story.
- Stay on the topic, PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK, and forgive people their spelling errors.
Noozhawk's intent is not to limit the discussion of our stories but to elevate it. Thank you for your respectful participation. Click here for our complete Terms of Use.
Comments are moderated, and will not appear until they've been approved.
» on 02.08.10 @ 11:26 AM
Follow the arc of Kotkin’s writing and thinking over the years, and you notice that he
attacks issues from all sides, switching his views and priorities often, so you’re never
quite sure where he’s coming from, or why.
Notice that many of the “up and coming” younger metropolises Kotkin endorsed at the
peak of the building bubble are in hot, arid areas.
Most have limited or sub-optimal, reliable water supplies. Most are heavily dependent on high energy consumption both to move water, and to supply electricity for air conditioning.
Most are based on sprawl, and long commutes.
If global warming and climate change forecasts prove real, most of Kotkin’s new
entrepreneurial paradises are doomed.
Kotkin’s metropolises of the future sound like candidates for Jared Diamond’s sequel to “Collapse” - on why civilizations fail.
» on 02.10.10 @ 02:19 PM
What in the heck is this air head trying to say? Do you know Publius (I mean you read it and commented, so I’m assuming you made sense out of it)? Is this a rant against suburbia? And if so is she proposing we all live in large over crowded cities in a small apartment on the 34th floor? And how does her animosity for low rise sprawling living square with the city that hates any building taller than my back yard shrubs?
More Local News »
Suzanne McNeely: Rising Trend in Elder Abuse Cases Can Be Stopped
The keys to preventing financial exploitation are prevention, protection and intervention
Mona Charen: Beware of Democrats Bearing Gifts
Decades of out-of-control, public-sector spending have left us at an economic dead-end, and the last thing we need is a huge new entitlement
David Sirota: The Senate’s Lesson About Democracy
The fundamental problem with our political system stems from a lack of accountability
Justin Tevis: Bacara ECO:nomics Summit Unaffordable In More Ways than One
Elitist conclusions on energy policy are way too expensive for Americans and America
Froma Harrop: Obama Not Gutless After All
President shows he's not afraid to take a stand against those resisting change
Weather: Fair 50.0º
Search Noozhawk »
