Small-scale Farming

I heard this this morning on NPR -

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/12/17/251713829/forget-golf-courses-subdivisions-draw-residents-with-farms

(Quoted text follows):

Forget Golf Courses: Subdivisions Draw Residents With Farms

by LUKE RUNYON

December 17, 2013 3:15 AM

When you picture a housing development in the suburbs, you might imagine golf courses, swimming pools, rows of identical houses.

But now, there's a new model springing up across the country that taps into the local food movement: Farms — complete with livestock, vegetables and fruit trees — are serving as the latest suburban amenity.

It's called development-supported agriculture, a more intimate version of community-supported agriculture — a farm-share program commonly known as CSA. In planning a new neighborhood, a developer includes some form of food production — a farm, community garden, orchard, livestock operation, edible park — that is meant to draw in new buyers, increase values and stitch neighbors together.

"These projects are becoming more and more mainstream," says Ed McMahon, a fellow with the Urban Land Institute. He estimates that more than 200 developments with an agricultural twist already exist nationwide.

"Golf courses cost millions to build and maintain, and we're kind of overbuilt on golf courses already," he says. "If you put in a farm where we can grow things and make money from the farm, it becomes an even better deal."

In Fort Collins, Colo., developers are currently constructing one of the country's newest development-supported farms. At first blush, the Bucking Horse development looks like your average halfway-constructed subdivision. But look a bit closer and you'll see a historic rustic red farm house and a big white barn enclosed by the plastic orange construction fencing.

The Bucking Horse subdivision in Fort Collins, Colo., will include a working CSA farm, complete with historic barn, farm house and chicken coop.

The Bucking Horse subdivision in Fort Collins, Colo., will include a working CSA farm, complete with historic barn, farm house and chicken coop.

Luke Runyon/Harvest Public Media

"When we show it, people are either like, 'You guys are crazy. I don't see the vision here at all,' or they come and they're like, 'This is going to be amazing,' " says Kristin Kirkpatrick, who works for Bellisimo Inc., the developer that purchased the 240-acre plot of land.

When finished, Bucking Horse will support more than 1,000 households. Agriculture and food production are the big draws, Kirkpatrick says. Land has been set aside for vegetables. There will be goats and chickens, too, subsidized by homeowners. Soon they'll be hiring a farmer for a 3.6-acre CSA farm. There's also a plaza designed for a farmers market, and an educational center where homeowners can take canning classes.

In short, the neighborhood plan is infused with the quaint, pastoral, even romantic view of farming.

"Our public restrooms are in an old chicken coop, and it'll be half public restroom and half chicken coop," Kirkpatrick says.

After World War II, Americans escaping crowded cities flocked to the suburbs. Most suburbanites didn't want to be right next to a farm, and so restrictive zoning pushed livestock and tractors out of new residential areas. Now, says Lindsay Ex, an environmental planner with the city of Fort Collins, municipalities are being forced to change their codes.

"We used to have residential separated from agriculture, and now we're seeing those uses combined," says Ex.

And that can be a great deal for small-time farmers, says Quint Redmond, who runs a company called Agriburbia, which operates farms within suburban developments across the country. In development-supported agriculture projects, he says, the developer, or homeowners association, ends up making the big farm purchases — not the farmer.

"The best possible thing for a farmer is to have the infrastructure ready," he says. "That is where most farming goes upside down or goes broke."

Not to mention that the neighborhood is filled with people who already have an interest in local food, so "there's a real market for that farmer," Redmond says.

The marketing of these new neighborhoods appears to be working — at least at Bucking Horse, where the developer says 200 single-family lots were snatched up within days of going on the market. Values of existing homes have jumped 25 percent since construction began on the agricultural amenities.

"Once we saw this and the plans they had for it, we were really sold on the lifestyle," says Lindley Greene, who moved to Bucking Horse in March with her husband and two young sons.

Once the neighborhood farm is up and running, Greene says, she'll be volunteering to get her hands dirty.

"We love the idea of it," she says. "To have it right here — not have it in our backyard, but still in our backyard — is awesome."

This story comes to us via Harvest Public Media, a public radio reporting collaboration that focuses on agriculture and food production.

(Back to me)

I think this is an interesting  (if not really new) concept. The idea of allowing a mix of uses - rural, suburban, and even very high density urban - in close geographical proximity is intriguing. It's a major shift from what we've evolved into as a planning-type society, but there are models for this kind of thing elsewhere in the world. In Korea, for example, it wasn't unusual to see a high-rise apartment block rising out of what appeared to be a rice field. They have to do this there because competing uses of the land require the same space - growing rice requires a very flat area, which is also where it is desirable to build houses. So rather than spread out, they stack the residents on top of each other. I'm not saying it's desirable or would work here, but it has worked in other places. Residents get the convenience of densely-populated areas, with some of the bucolic feel that people everywhere seem to desire. It's also a very good way of consolidating infrastructure costs. By keeping developments small, geographically, it's much more efficient for the municipality to maintain roads, water, sanitary sewer, and storm drainageways. It also means that the overall environmental footprint of development is smaller.

While the article cited above points to a relatively small trend here in the United States, it's indicative of a shift in people's thinking from historical trends, where people wanted to have their own suburban quarter acre. Now, people are starting to realize that it's both an inefficient use of land as well as a maintenance burden they'd rather not have. Like the quote goes above - the gardening center is in very close proximity, without being literally in one's "backyard." It will be interesting to see how this trend plays out.

Dream City?

I recently read this article:

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/cities-americans-moving-escaping-154840318.html?l=1

Quoted text follows:

For much of the nation’s history, Americans moved around mostly to find decent work. But these days, people may be more inclined to move in search of low taxes, cheap housing and like-minded citizens they’re comfortable being around. Such shifts in internal migration patterns could transform the U.S. economy and the political establishment in sweeping and unforeseen ways.

That’s the contention in Shaping Our Nation, the latest book from political historian Michael Barone of the American Enterprise Institute and the Washington Examiner, who also-co-authors the biennial Almanac of American Politics. In Shaping Our Nation, Barone explains a new way Americans define an enduring urge: “to pursue dreams and escape nightmares.” Today's nightmare cities, Barone says, are mostly familiar ones: Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, and other former factory towns that no longer have enough jobs to support a shrinking population. The new dream cities tend to be ones in which low taxes and low housing costs are fostering population growth and prosperity: Houston, Dallas-Ft. Worth, Nashville, Atlanta and several “mini Atlantas” including Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and Jacksonville.

Barone detects another pivotral trend, as he explains in the video above: the movement of Americans to “culturally congenial” places where they feel they fit in. This has a lot to do with a kind of self-segregation that's occuring along a blue-red political fault line. Older, conservative Americans, for instance, are migrating to “well-churched” cities in Texas, where the population has grown 53% since 1990—twice the national rate. “Texas has been a huge growth magnet over the last 20 years,” Barone says, “and not because it has pleasant weather.”

Liberals, meanwhile, seem to be increasingly inclined to head for their own cultural redoubts. "You'll see liberal professionals go to the San Francisco Bay Area," Barone points out. "They wouldn't leave for the Dallas-Ft. Worth metroplex if you tripled their salary."

Barone's survey of U.S. migration patterns in Shaping Our Nation goes all the way back to colonial days. Connecting the dots across generations provides a richer view of trends today than pundits scanning the latest poll ratings or batch of economic figures are likely to get.

From 1970 to 2010, for instance, there was a “mass internal migration” of Americans from northern industrial cities to newer, more welcoming Sun Belt locales. This north-to-south migration is typically attributed to shifting job trends (and better weather), but Barone points out that two of the states to gain the most population during that time—Texas and Florida—also lured people because there is no state income tax.

California, meanwhile, enjoyed a huge influx of people from 1930 until 1990, but has since begun to lose people and businesses fleeing high taxes, regulatory overkill and everyday hassles such as congestion. Many of those people have moved to lower-tax mountain states such as Utah, Colorado and Idaho, while most of the newcomers to California during the last two decades have been Latino immigrants.

Cities and states that gain population always enjoy greater political power, of course, as their representation in Washington increases. And economic momentum can be self-perpetuating, since more companies are likely to relocate to a particular region once other businesses have gotten the ball rolling. So there may continue to be a national power shift that favors the south and the mountain states, at the expense of the trendy right and left coasts and unionized cities of the upper Midwest.

Some of the high-tax, high-cost cities can fight back, of course, by lowering taxes and doing more to create a business-friendly environment that lures employers. They may even develop an advantage as their economies stagnate and wage rates fall, lowering labor costs for companies that might resettle there. Still, many nightmare cities remain saddled with pension costs for former employees and other liabilities that aren’t easy to escape. No wonder people move.

End of quoted text.

What I find interesting about this article is how heavily slanted it appears to be towards lower taxes. It is true that personal income tax is lower in Texas (there isn't any), but property taxes are still very high. In my mind, it's a wash. Taxation is really fairly equitable across most of the nation. Oregon has no sales tax, but income and property taxes are relatively high. Utah has moderate property, sales, and income tax. It all evens out - people demand a certain level of service from their government, and that service has to be paid for. Where demands are higher, taxes are also relatively higher. But it's also not a drastic increase.

The remark is made, somewhat tongue in cheek, regarding the weather in Texas not being an attractive feature. I'm not sure that the sarcasm is warranted. Weather very well could be a factor, along with the other intangibles that the article mentions, including political ideology, perceived religiosity, low housing costs (which are market-driven), and historical ties to a region or community. The South is a place that many left following the jobs north during/after the great depression. Now the trend has reversed, and folks (and jobs) are finding their way back to the South. It's a complex thing. We haven't seen enough history to know for sure if this is a cyclical thing, or if this is just a system seeking equilibrium. For that, we'll just have to wait and see.

I am a city planner, and as such, I want to believe that there are systems for affecting this sort of thing. That one could adjust the dials of taxes and business opportunity and X, Y, and Z variables in order to produce a healthy, growing community. But the logic defies me, and I laugh both at my hubris and the fickle nature of the human social machine.

It's a very delighted, enthralled laugh from my very soul.

Voting

When the colonists in the Americas started getting frustrated with the motherland, one of the main gripes was with regard to the parliamentary process in Britain not allowing for representation from America. Under the old system, which really was based on feudal laws dating back to William the Conqueror and earlier, only land holders could vote. And really, only those of the upper class of land owners (the house of lords) could affect policy and change in the country. The colonies were literally owned and governed by these lords in Britain, and they decided what would be best for them, not the colonies. And since their loyalty was to themselves and their own coffers, they enacted legislation that would prove to be incredibly onerous, if not completely disastrous. So the Americans decided they didn't want to be taxed (or governed) without having a say in how things went. We all know what happened.

It is interesting, then, when I see how little that effort has continued to mean to us. I don't know why it is, but it seems we've become more complacent. While presidential election turn out tends to be relatively high, off year elections remain incredibly poorly attended. We just don't go. In Mont Belvieu, the city where I still officially live, there was a very significant ballot initiative - that of a home rule charter for the city. And yet, people stayed away from the polls in droves. I think attendance was in the single digits - roughly 300 people voted. The same thing is true out here in Grants Pass, where an important tax levy was on the ballot. The turnout was around 53% in the county, which is actually pretty good, all things considered. In town the numbers were about the same.

It never ceases to impress me how little value we ascribe to this right. We live in a modern world of convenience, distraction, and relative comfort. Perhaps we have been lulled by the siren call of security. Perhaps we can't be bothered to give up a little time to mail in the ballot. Or stop by a polling place. Whatever the reason, the effect is clear - we become disassociated with our government, and then we complain when it doesn't appear to be working for us. Approval of congress is incredibly low, yet people don't get out to vote for anything different.

It's a bit discouraging, at times.

Yet, it doesn't have to be that way. We can (and should) get back to the polls early and often. We can (and should) become interested and informed in what's going on. We can (and should) engage in civil civic dialogue with friends and neighbors, sharing views and helping to foster interest in what's going on. And we can (and should) even run for office ourselves. It's our right. We are Americans. And we are amazing.

Chicanes

Life is interesting.

Maybe an understatement, but undoubtedly true.

When I was in High School... more years ago than I care to admit... I was in the band. I played trombone, and I had a great time at it. I wasn't super serious about it, but it was a blast and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

One year we came on band tour to the northwest of the United States. Our journey took us through several western states, with stops along the way. One of the places we'd stopped was Grants Pass, Oregon. I was immediately attracted to the place - not only for it's natural beauty, which is surpassing, but for the good people we met here, for the indescribable feeling that exists in a small town that calls its citizens back from wherever they may roam. It is small enough to be close knit, and large enough to have everything that a town should.

It was one of those places that gets stuck in the back of your mind, that if there was EVER a chance to get back there, one would jump at it. I'd even wistfully thought of it as a place to retire, when the time came.

When my good friend Michael Black, with whom I'd attended grad school, came out here to be the Director of Community Development, I was more than a little envious. But then, just a few months ago, I'd heard that he was hiring an assistant. Well, naturally I looked into the opportunity. Everything worked out, and here I am. I've been here for three days now, and the shock and pleasure is renewed every time I drive down the road, walk around downtown, or even just think about how life is truly good sometimes.

I am so excited to be here. There is a lot going on in this small-ish community, and I can't wait to jump in and get to work. If you have any questions or concerns, please let me know. I will do what I can to help.

National Park

The Google art thing for today is honoring the 123rd anniversary of the creation of Yosemite National Park. It's the second oldest, after Yellowstone, and one of the most majestic places on earth. Being conveniently located about half-way between San Francisco and Los Angeles, but far enough away that you kind of have to want to go there, the place is visited by thousands every year.

National parks are America's gift to itself. We, the people, set aside these areas to protect, preserve, and enjoy them, making sure that they're available for our own use, but also for future generations as well. It's one of America's best ideas, and one that is important to the legacy of conservation, environmental protection, and wildlife preservation. It was in a National Park that I first started feeling my own desire to become interested in the environment and its preservation.

I have been to many National Parks and Monuments, and they're all incredibly lovely. The National Parks Service deserves great credit for what they do. Having the dual mandate to preserve and protect, and also provide access to, the natural beauty, the Service is faced with difficult and often conflicting challenges. They handle these things well, however, carefully balancing the need to keep the places clean and natural with the need to help people become aware of the beauty that is there.

Today the National Parks are closed due to the political wrangling going on in Washington. Because it's well into the fall and slow season, I'd imagine not many are going to be affected by this closure - as opposed to say Memorial Day weekend. But it highlights the importance of these places. Even if we cannot go visit today, we can still explore online and discover new and exciting places to go visit. It's fun to plan trips out to these great natural treasures and dream about what it would be like to be there.

And perhaps, in the meantime, Congress can get itself sorted. :) We can only hope.

Legacy in a Community

It's interesting to think about what you'll be remembered for after you've gone on... What will people say about me when I've shuffled off this mortal coil? What will be my legacy?

This was recently in the paper:
MB’s Eagle Drive nearing completion

Posted: Sunday, September 15, 2013 12:00 am
By Mark Fleming mark.fleming@baytownsun.com

All of the traffic lanes are open on Eagle Drive in Mont Belvieu, and the final touches should be finished by the end of October, a couple of months ahead of schedule, City Administrator Bryan Easum said.

Construction work by Angel Brothers should be finished within two or three weeks, Easum said, and landscaping work soon after. When all of the work is finished, he said, the estimated cost is $15.4 million for the road and related drainage work and $523,000 for landscaping – about a half million dollars under budget.

Eagle Drive is home to many of Mont Belvieu’s businesses, as well as all Barbers Hill ISD schools, city and county offices, the city park and many homes and apartments.

The construction effort replaced about 2.5 miles of a street that had two lanes, a turning lane and ditches with a four-lane boulevard with a landscaped median and sidewalks on both sides. The median will have 195 trees when landscaping is complete. New street lighting is in place and will be working soon. On the west side, Eagle Drive has a standard 4-foot sidewalk, Easum said. The east side has a 10-foot wide sidewalk. “If you come out here in the evenings at 6 or 7 o’clock, you’ll see a lot of people riding bikes and jogging and walking up and down the new sidewalk.”

While the first thing motorists are likely to notice is that the street is more attractive than the one it replaced, Easum said the need for replacement was practical. Projections are that Eagle Drive will one day carry as much traffic as Baytown’s Garth Road. A road with a median, as the new Eagle Drive has, can carry more traffic than an undivided roadway, and is about 40 percent safer, he said.

When reminded that former city planner Bill Cobabe had said Mont Belvieu built the new Eagle Drive to avoid having “another Garth Road,” Easum chuckled and said only, “We don’t want to have the clutter that’s sometimes seen on area roads.”

Before the construction began, he said, the city also enacted ordinances controlling the appearance of businesses along the road, and require new businesses to have parking lots that connect to neighboring businesses – a feature that reduces the number of times cars enter traffic lanes. The new street is already making a difference,

Easum said. “I think it’s already totally changed the appearance. When we have business prospects and stuff come out, we’ve had several comment how much it’s changed and how good it looks over the old three-lane road with ditches,” he said.

Another project that is changing the appearance of Eagle Drive for the better, Easum said, is the addition of nearly 400 trees to the city park. The trees were much cheaper than the ones on Eagle Drive, as the vendor wanted to dispose of them since they weren’t quite up to the appearance standards expected by landscape architects.

“They were 9- or 10-year-old trees, so it really gave us a head start on trees out there,” Easum said. “We paid about a third of the price for those trees that we paid for the trees on Eagle Drive,” he said. “These look very natural in a park setting.”

Easum said some of the new trees have died after transplanting, but the vendor is replacing them.

(Back to me)

I'm not entirely sure how to take that - that that's all I'm remembered for is not wanting Eagle Drive to look like Garth Road. Not that I think that's a bad thing. It was nice that Bryan pointed out that we also enacted ordinances regarding signage, architectural standards, and parking that will help with the appearance of the community as well.

In a very real sense, a community is a dynamic thing, and one person's influence is never as great as that person would hope. I ran into Mike Pomykal from the City Council the other day at the post office, and he said that I'd had an impact on the community - that I'd made a difference. That made me feel really good. Because you know what? Every little bit helps. And I was part of something in Mont Belvieu that I am very proud of.

Clash of the Civilizations

One of the more unique qualities of the United States is that we are expected, upon arrival, to integrate within the larger fabric of the US culture. This means that there are a lot of wonderful and interesting combinations of things, from Korean tacos to sushi bars featuring raw fish and avocados. It also means that we add everyone's strengths and weaknesses to our own. This works well in many cases because one person's weakness is another person's strength, and thus we are all stronger due to they collective power of living in a society.

It is imperfect, to be sure, but it is marvelous and ever-changing and unpredictable. And that is just the way we like it. We learn. We grow. We progress. And we are all better for it.

Last night on my trek home from work I heard the following:

http://www.npr.org/2013/09/03/218627286/a-look-back-at-a-predicted-clash-of-civilizations

(Transcript follows:)

A Look Back At A Predicted 'Clash Of Civilizations'
September 03, 2013

ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:

Twenty years ago this summer, the journal Foreign Affairs published what proved to be a very controversial article. The political scientist Samuel Huntington declared a new phase to world politics. The fundamental source of conflict in this new world, he wrote, will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The Cold War was over and the Soviet Union was finished. As Huntington put it to Charlie Rose...

SAMUEL HUNTINGTON: The big question is what will be the patterns of association and of conflict among nations in the post-Cold War world. And if one looked at the evidence, it seems to me that it is overwhelming that nations are going to be aligning themselves along cultural lines.

SIEGEL: There would be a "Clash of Civilizations." That was the title of the Foreign Affairs article, which grew into a book.

Samuel Huntington died five years ago, but the often furious arguments that his thesis inspired can still be heard now and again. And this summer, Foreign Affairs, which is published by the Council on Foreign Relations, marked the 20th anniversary with an issue that collected many of the writings - pro and con - that have clashed over the "Clash of Civilization."

And joining us today is the editor of the Foreign Affairs, Gideon Rose. Welcome to the program once again.

GIDEON ROSE: Good to be here.

SIEGEL: On Huntington's map of the world's civilizations, there was: Western, Latin American, African, Eastern Orthodox, Islamic, Confucian, Hindu and Japanese. Is it fair to say that elite opinion scoffed at this schematic of the world civilizations?

ROSE: They did. On the other hand, it's also fair to say that many of the individual arguments about the specifics didn't get at the larger point, which is really about how much culture matters as opposed to broad, impersonal structural forces like geopolitics or economics or ideology.

SIEGEL: For some context here, in the early 1990s, European communism had imploded. But in Yugoslavia, there was a war that had Orthodox Serbs, Catholic Croats and Bosnian Muslims at one another's throats. That, I think, influenced Huntington a great deal, didn't it?

ROSE: Yeah, I think what also influenced Sam was the fact that there was a feeling out there, after the end of the Cold War, either that the world would go peacefully towards democracy and international harmony - which he didn't believe - or that the kinds of patterns that we see the past of conflict, conflict over ideologies, like the Cold War; conflicts over geopolitics, like the modern European history with nations jockeying for power like billiard balls, that those would replay themselves.

And what he felt was that cultural differences among nations and among peoples would reassert themselves over some of these other factors. And that the largest variable you can think of, culturally, was civilization and that that would therefore be a kind of dividing line that people hadn't paid enough attention to.

SIEGEL: An interesting commentator on the Huntington article was the writer Fouad Ajami, who both criticized it severely in his first review and then, years later, rethought his criticism of Huntington. Tell us about Ajami's writings.

ROSE: Well, one of the points that Ajami made in his additional attack on, or response to the "Clash" article, which we've included in the collection, was that states are pretty wily and they can sort of maneuver themselves and be trickier than the civilizations they're supposedly part of. And that Huntington had sort of under estimated the extent to which states make their own destinies, rather than being trapped in a civilizational mode.

But after 9/11 and the war on terror, when it seemed like there were these broad drivers in world politics in which radical Islam had come to play such a role and the West had come into conflict with Islam in various ways, Fouad argued that Huntington had a point about the extent to which some other factors managed to override normal geopolitics in many respects, or could do so. And that maybe the thesis had more staying power and validity than he had given it credit for.

SIEGEL: In his original review though, Ajami made another point. It was that while nationalist leaders in Yugoslavia managed to emphasize the civilizational differences between being Orthodox, Catholic and Muslim, these groups in most times were remarkably similar in terms of language and custom. And the lines between civilizations are a lot more fluid and porous than they might be made out to be.

ROSE: I think that's absolutely true. And the best arguments, it seems to me, against Huntington's thesis are that it's very hard to pin down exactly what the civilizations are, that the borders are fuzzy, and that people can be many things simultaneously, and that the specifics of the argument - when it tries to become predictive - quickly get very either fuzzy or inaccurate.

SIEGEL: As you said, Huntington fared better after 9/11, or his ideas did. Twenty years after he wrote, having failed to mediate a Mid-East peace or normalize relations with Iran, after a decade of war in Afghanistan and Iraq, a civil war in Syria, the very fitful revolution in Egypt, does the Mid-East start to look like it's vindicating Samuel Huntington, that their problems are cultural, civilizational?

ROSE: Well, you know, there's fascinating things going on here. The problems that the Arab Spring has run into suggests that it's actually difficult to get things off the ground, that it's going to be a long time before what you might consider normal patterns of development assert themselves.

And I think the way to think about this is we know that modernization makes countries somewhat similar. But we also know that it doesn't make them exactly alike and that it can in many respects bring out their differences. And that modernization is not the same thing as Westernization. When you've come into the modern world, when you've gotten liberalism, when you've gotten democracy, when you've gotten an advanced level economic development, will you still end up having dramatic cultural differences that will keep people thinking and perhaps acting differently from each other?

SIEGEL: Gideon Rose, editor of Foreign Affairs, thanks for talking with us today.

ROSE: Thank you.

SIEGEL: We were discussing the 20th anniversary of the publication of the article "Clash of Civilizations" by political scientist Samuel Huntington.

(End of quoted text; The emphasis is mine).

Very interesting points. My contention is that this holds true on a geopolitical scale, but it also has relevance on a national, and even regional scale. As we look at our communities, are we fractured along lines of culture and civilization? Do we form opinions about people based on geography? And, while racial inequality continues to linger, do the larger issues of poverty and access to education - which are of course tied to race, unfortunately - continue to divide us into classes and cultures? Do neighborhoods even within the same community come together or find reasons to stay apart? And, are not these the same seeds of what we're seeing on a global scale?

I am not one to say that any culture is better than any other. I am concerned, though, when I think that people might not want to associate with another because of religious or cultural differences. In reality, the ties which bind us together, the ideals, goals, and dreams we share, are much greater than the niggling little differences that keep us apart. 

I hope that we can find ways to celebrate one another, both the commonalities and the differences.

Growth for growth's sake...

At the risk of sounding like I'm an NPR junkie (I am...), I offer the following -

http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2013/08/12/211202243/too-much-too-fast-china-sees-backlash-from-massive-growth

(Quoted text follows)

Too Much, Too Fast: China Sees Backlash From Massive Growth
by JIM ZARROLI
August 12, 2013

At a time when much of the world is mired in economic torpor, China still enjoys enviable growth rates. Yet there's no question that its economy is growing more slowly these days.

Just ask Yan Liwei, a salesman for a construction materials company, who was visiting a park in Shanghai this weekend. "The number of new construction projects is declining somewhat. It's taking longer for many of our clients to pay us what they owe," Liwei says. "Many small and midsized developers are feeling a cash crunch."

This slowdown is partly due to the global economic downturn. But economist Michael Pettis of Peking University believes there's something more fundamental taking place. Pettis says China is at a stage in its economic growth that every fast-growing country eventually reaches.

Three decades ago, China was badly underdeveloped. To catch up with other countries it had to pour vast sums of money into roads, bridges, office buildings and factories, and this meant dizzying rates of growth. But eventually, Pettis says, all this building reaches a point of diminishing returns.

"When that happens the investment ends up becoming not so much wealth creating, but in many cases wealth destroying," he says. "In other words, the increased productivity generated by that investment is less than the cost of the investment."

At this point, Pettis says countries like China need to fundamentally change their growth strategy. They need to stop building all those roads and shopping malls.

"So if you want to rebalance the economy, you have to sort of kill the engine of all of that growth," he says

Pettis says that if China is to keep growing, its growth has to come from consumption. It needs to make a whole lot of policy steps that will make it easier for Chinese people to spend money — like raising wages — or eliminating residency laws that penalize people who move.

Pettis says this kind of fundamental change in economic direction is very difficult to pull off.

"The transition period for every country that's gone through [this] process has been politically very difficult," he says. "And quite frankly very few countries have gotten through this phase successfully."

The good news is that China knows it has a problem and is trying to do something about it, says economist Eswar Prasad of Cornell University and the Brookings Institution.

China has tightened credit to slow down the construction of all those office buildings and shopping malls. But Prasad says that with the global economy so vulnerable China can't afford to try anything too risky.

"The Chinese government is facing this very delicate balance," Prasad says. "They know that the way they're growing right now is creating some problems, but if they slow down the growth all of those problems come and hit them in the face right away."

Prasad says there's another problem. A lot of Chinese companies depend on the flow of easy credit to stay afloat, and he says they're likely to fight any effort to change the system. In fact, the reform efforts have led to vicious infighting among political and business interests.

"The system as it is structured right now works really well for the large state-owned enterprises, the large banks and for many provincial governments," he says. "These are all politically very powerful. So they have every incentive to maintain the status quo and not change anything."

In the face of this opposition, China seems to have backtracked a bit and recently eased credit conditions again. Economist Todd Lee of IHS Global Insight says he doesn't believe China's leaders have shown the resolve they need to tackle the big problems.

"What they really need to do is push through the next wave of significant structural reforms," Lee says, "and they haven't done that."

Still, China has navigated its way through the global economy with considerable success in recent years. Now it needs to find a way to change course and do so once again.

(Back to me)

The land speculation and meteoric rise of property values in China has been nothing short of miraculous. And yet, looking at the toll it has taken on both the environment and the culture of China, one begins to wonder if it is worth it.

There are, of course, myriad benefits of living in a western-style economy/society. Children are healthy. Access to health care, clean water and air, and other goods and services, means that the fear of lack and want has been reduced. Underdeveloped countries across the world could gain much through improved access to food, health care, quality shelter, clothing, and other beneficial aspects of living in a global market society.

But what are the costs? Chief among the benefits of living in a more western society is access to healthier lifestyles. These were born out of the industrial revolution, where people looked at the conditions they lived in and demanded better - not just clean water and air, but safer housing, better transportation options, and quality, healthy food. But what happens when you cannot keep supporting the changes that have taken place - when the very engines of progress end up becoming the very things you sought to eliminate? This is much more difficult to talk about.

In the west, we took successive generations to both create the lifestyle we enjoy, and then understand the impacts - economically, culturally, and environmentally. It took us over 100 years just to realize that clean water and air were priorities, and it took some very serious catastrophes to arrive at that understanding. China, which was really born as a nation only 60 years ago, is polluting itself at a prodigious rate, and it is consuming land and resources (all based on artificially cheap and easily accessible credit) at an even quicker pace.

Truly, the next 60 years in China are going to be interesting to watch.

Preservation and Property Rights

So I heard this one this morning:

http://www.npr.org/2013/07/29/205850412/miami-beach-preservationists-battle-glitterati-over-homes

(Article text follows:)

Some of Miami Beach's quietest and most historic neighborhoods can be found in a chain of small islands connected by a causeway. On Di Lido Island, a community of homes built 50 and 60 years ago is being torn down and replaced, lot by lot. On one street alone, five houses currently are slated for demolition.

Daniel Ciraldo stands across the street from two '60s-era houses that will soon be demolished and replaced by a new home nearly double their combined size.

"We're looking at ceiling heights of around 10 foot per floor. And then, a roof deck on top that's going to loom over the neighbors," Ciraldo says.

Ciraldo is a member of the Miami Design Preservation League, a group that 30 years ago helped convince Miami Beach to preserve its district of Art Deco-era hotels. Now the group is working to save historic homes in Miami Beach's neighborhoods.

As Miami Beach's real estate market has heated up, Ciraldo says, developers have discovered the neighborhoods. Homes on the water costing millions — even historic ones — now are considered tear-downs.

For years he says, Miami Beach saw just two or three demolitions a year in residential neighborhoods. But that's changed.

"In 2012, that number skyrocketed to 24. And in 2013, we're projecting 29. And so we're looking at about 8 years worth of demolitions now happening in one year," Ciraldo says.

Ciraldo and his group are worried about the demolitions and how the new, large houses — McMansions, detractors call them — are changing the character of the neighborhoods. They're also concerned about Miami Beach's history.

A Real Battle

Star Island, a short drive across another causeway, has some of the area's best views. It overlooks Biscayne Bay and the Miami skyline. Some homes here sell for $35 million.

Ciraldo parks outside of a house that's become the poster child for efforts to stop the runaway demolitions.

"It is one of the most visible and most historic homes in Miami Beach," Ciraldo says.

It was designed and built in 1925 by one of Florida's first architects. But this is where history collides with reality — or at least reality TV. The owners of the home are featured in the Bravo TV show Real Housewives of Miami. Leonard Hochstein is a plastic surgeon who has trademarked his nickname, the "Boob God." His wife, one of the reality TV show's stars, is Lisa Hochstein.

After buying the property on Star Island, the Hochsteins asked Miami Beach for permission to tear it down and replace it with a 20,000-square-foot compound, complete with wine cellar, five-car garage, a guest house and staff quarters.

The city gave permission for demolition, but the Miami Design Preservation League intervened. The group sought to have the home designated historic, went to court and so far have blocked demolition.

In the meantime, the fight has spurred Miami Beach to declare a temporary moratorium on demolitions in the city while it considers ways to update its zoning and better preserve historic homes.

At a recent city commission meeting, Dr. Hochstein charged that the moratorium is aimed at him.

"The moratorium is about punishment. It's about punishing individuals. And nobody knows that more than me — because what myself and my family have had to gone through since we have tried to do something everybody has the right to do and followed the rules enacted by the city in doing so," he said.

Miami Beach Mayor Matti Hererra Bower doesn't quite see it that way.

"How about he's picking on us because he wants to demolish it? And there's more people that don't want that demolished. He's picking on Miami Beach," she says.

The moratorium, the mayor points out, doesn't affect the Hochstein's home or others that have already received demolition permits. If the court ultimately finds in the Hochstein's favor, they can tear down the 88-year-old home and replace it with their dream house.

But Bower says even if the home is lost, the battle has mobilized the community, bringing more and more residents out to city commission meetings.

"They see the quality of life changing. That's why so many people are coming, because 10 years ago, they had never seen a house, what could go next to it. Now they see it," Bower says.

The battle over the future of the home of Star Island will play out in the courts — and also on TV. The Hochsteins angered historic preservationists recently when they spattered fake blood on the walls of the vacant mansion for a gangster-themed party. Among the guests were fellow cast members of the Real Housewives of Miami — and a Bravo TV film crew.

(Back to me)

Historic Preservation is an interesting thing. In essence, the community is saying that the needs of the community to hold on to the visual and aesthetic properties of certain buildings and other man-made features outweigh the potential need for a property owner to redevelop. This can govern everything from paint colors to adding a new deck to the width of siding used on a particular house.  While it may seem a fairly intensive and invasive approach, it also helps preserve the essential character of a historic neighborhood, meaning that everyone's property values are enhanced through this preservation. 

People's needs change, however. Their means and their desires change over time. People may find it necessary or desirable to change their physical environment - add on another room to make way for another child, or aging parents, for example. They may want to stay in the same neighborhood for any number of reasons - social network, climate (those Miami Beach locations sound very attractive!), proximity to goods and services or work, and many others. And it may just come down to a matter of taste, which also changes over time. Maybe the little craftsman style bungalow was appealing, but now something more modern is desired.

All of these are perfectly valid reasons for a particular property owner to wish to change their property. Yet, in places deemed of historical value, cities, counties, and even states and the federal government all bring to bear a series of regulations that limit the ability of folks to alter their properties. This can bring these regulations and the property owner's desires into direct conflict.

So who wins? Whose needs trump the others?

On one hand, property rights seem to dictate that whatever is desired should be allowed. After all, all that is now old or historic was once new, and no one complained then. And we live in a country that is very much in favor of allowing people to do what they want with their own property. As long as what they want doesn't interfere with what other's want.

On the other hand, one doesn't move into a historic home/neighborhood without having at least some idea of what they're getting into. A historic home is as much a labor of love as it is an investment in a place to live. They're creaky, need constant maintenance, and require attention that a regular, newer home just doesn't demand. And you have to know that going in, or you're in for a world of disappointment and frustration. It can be very rewarding, but it takes work.

It's unclear from the article what the motive is for the doctor and his wife to want to remodel/tear down the space. There are ways of expanding one's home in a tasteful way, one that does not detract from the rest of the property and neighborhood. This has been done all over the country to great success. So the need for additional space shouldn't be a barrier. If it has to do with style, my opinion is that they should leave the place and find some property that is less sensitive. It would make everyone's life easier. In this instance, however, it appears that a law suit has been filed, so it will be interesting to see what comes out of it.

Motown

So if you've heard the news at all recently, you've no doubt noted that Detroit is bankrupt.

A bankrupt city is an interesting animal for a number of reasons. Detroit's woes stem from a long history of local, national, and even global events - most of which the city itself could have done little to remedy.

First off, Detroit became a manufacturing hub in the early part of 1900s. This is due to a series of happy accidents - it was on Lake St. Clair and Lake Huron, which means that it has easy access to shipping of raw materials from the steel mills in Pennsylvania and beyond. It also was the place which - for some reason - saw a significant interest in the design and innovation of automobiles, with the associated start up companies. Ford, GM (including Cadillac, Pontiac, Chevrolet, GMC, and others), and AMC all began in and around Detroit. In a rapidly expanding spiral of growth, ancillary industrial expansion, and support services, together with great marketing and good prices, Detroit became the place to go for people to be able to earn a good wage. Here is where the labor unions of the 1800s really were able to flex their muscle, staging demonstrations and lobbying for better working conditions and wages.

All of this expansion meant a vast influx of people, which generated need for housing, schools, roads, water and sewer lines, parks, libraries, and on and on... The horizon was distant, and who would have ever thought the bubble would burst? The city expanded, riding the rising tide of industrial might.

WWII was generally kind to Detroit. Factories were converted to military purposes, and women entered the workplace filling roles vacated by men. Most of these women did not stay in the factories, but many did, which began the modern movement for workplace equality. But I digress.

After WWII, the returning GIs fell on Detroit like a tidal wave. Black folks, in particular, found the easy access to jobs, good/affordable housing, and the relative lack of stereotypes found in the South to be a boon. As a result, Detroit is now over 80% African American. This is in stark contrast with the rest of the state.

Detroit's population continued to grow through the 50s, when the expansion stopped and started to decline. Manufacturers, taking advantage of cheaper labor outside of urban areas, began to spread out their interests. Now you had people making parts all across the country, and even assembly plants were moved to different locations. As the plants moved,so did the workers, and the population declines have been dramatic. The population of Detroit peaked between 1950 and 1960, when there were over 1.8 million people in the city. By 1990, the population had decreased to 1 million, and in the latest census, the number is only around 700,000.

I haven't mentioned much about the impact of environmental legislation, both in the cost of raw materials and in the manufacturing processes themselves, and the energy crises. Really, these factors played a role in the decline of Detroit, but they were just additional blows to an economy already reeling from the relocation of factories and support services outside the region.

So now, Detroit is faced with a vast housing surplus, decaying and dilapidated infrastructure, a vastly diminished tax base, and a veritable ocean of debt. Bankruptcy, in Detroit, is really the only viable option. So who is to blame, and what can we learn?

As can be seen, blame is difficult to pinpoint. There were so many factors that led to the decline that it's impossible to single out one that had a stand alone significant impact. One easy thing to point out, though, is the shortsightedness of planners and city officials. When one city or region puts all of it's eggs into a particular economic basket, the fall is absolutely disastrous. We have seen that in places like Houston in the 1980s, where there was no actual decline, but the anticipated growth was reduced from 20% to 2%. Houston, however, along with many other cities across the nation, have continued to prosper. Indeed, the region surrounding Detroit has continued to prosper in ways that are very dramatic. The population of the Detroit region has continued to grow, while Detroit itself has contracted to the point of insolubility. So what are we to learn?

Economic diversity is important. Having jobs in as many different sectors as possible is vital to the long-term growth and continued relevance of any city. Being so closely tied to any one particular industry means that the city is also subject to the periodic ebb and flow of that industry. Having a broader base of support, having a variety of economic sources, means that there is greater resilience to the vagaries of the market.

Further, fiscal responsibility and conservative policy are important. Cities are NOT like the Federal government. There is no regional shift possible: the Feds can rely on the idea that if California is doing poorly, that New York and Texas will be there to pick up the slack. Further, the Fed can raise taxes relatively easier, and the spending policies are much more likely to reflect the very long term - even out to 20 years or more. Cities don't have that luxury. In my experience, five years is really the longest term that a city should commit to. Beyond that, the waters are just too murky, market conditions just too mercurial, to perceive well what will happen.

Finally, I would (humbly) suggest that the responsibility lies with the planners for Detroit. City planners are not the end-all, be-all of a community. But we have the specific and unique task of trying to read the tea leaves and decide what is best for our communities. We work to serve and to improve the lot of the folks we live with. We have been trained in policy, in theory, and in practice on how to make places work. It was an unmitigated failure on the part of the city planners in Detroit, which failure goes back to the 50s and continued to the present day. Why didn't someone notice the population trend? Why did no one notice the declining tax revenues? Why were the costs of maintaining dilapidated infrastructure in far-flung regions never considered? Why wasn't more done by city leaders to help stem the tide of folks abandoning the area? Why didn't they reach out to other industries in an effort to diversify job/tax base?

I have been to Detroit. I was there in the late 90s when things were pretty bleak - and looking bleaker. I have been to many large cities around the world, and the thing that scared me most about Detroit was the absolute lack of people. No vehicular traffic. No folks milling around. No business people waiting for a bus. It was eerie, like a post-apocalyptic nightmare. I felt very uncomfortable and couldn't wait to get out. Which is a feeling I have never had before, even in the most sketchy parts of the various large cities I've been to, including LA, Chicago, Houston, Seoul, London, Paris, etc.

Ultimately, Detroit's failure was due to poor planning.

Where would YOU like to live?

Recently I came across this survey result:

In general, 54 percent of people most enjoy living in suburban or rural areas. But among those who say they don't have to have the last word in an argument, 74 percent most enjoy living in suburban or rural areas.

Based on a survey of 164 people who don't have to have the last word in an argument and 387 people total.

This, of course, brings to mind the problems with surveys in general. First off, this is an online survey, which means that the person completing the survey has a computer and internet access. This implies a lot about what the person's socio-economic status is. Also, the sample size is not large, and is self-selected - that is, those who want to participate in the survey may, while those who don't may opt out. There are any number of reasons why people opt not to participate, ranging from personal offense at the nature of the question to absolute ambivalence in the survey.

Any good survey has to have compelling questions without being leading. The above survey is binary - you are given only a selection of two choices. What's interesting about the survey is the correlation (hence the name of the site - correlated.org).

The first result is interesting in and of itself, and belies what the reality seems to indicate. The survey indicates that 54% of people most enjoy living in rural or suburban areas. In reality, there is a trend in the United States toward more urban living. More Americans live in urban areas now than ever before in history. However, perhaps this speaks to the perception that rural or suburban living is preferable, in spite of the numbers of people who are moving to more urban areas.

The correlated fact - that more people who don't have to have the last word in an argument prefer suburban/rural living - is interesting as well. It adds a psychological insight into those who prefer suburban/rural living. I'm not sure what the implications of that are, if any. Because, again, these folks are a minority of people anyway (164 of 387, or 42%). I think it's interesting to reverse the reported facts: that 58% of people DO have to have the last word in arguments, and 46% of people prefer to live in more urban areas.

The point is that we shouldn't put too much stock in surveys. They can be interesting and somewhat informative, but one should always question the motives behind the question, the conclusions that are being drawn, and how the data are manipulated to present or promote a certain viewpoint or agenda. The above survey is just a frivolous thing, although several conclusions can be drawn from this and other surveys they've done. The best surveys don't draw conclusions, but bring attention to the need for further questioning, study, and exploration.

Where the sidewalk ends...

I grew up loving Shel Silverstein. His poetry speaks of childhood and life and growth and exploration. He's amazing, and his words resonate clearly and distinctly.

This one in particular is one that I've always loved:

Where the Sidewalk Ends
 by Shel Silverstein

 There is a place where the sidewalk ends
And before the street begins,
And there the grass grows soft and white,
And there the sun burns crimson bright,
And there the moon-bird rests from his flight
To cool in the peppermint wind.

 Let us leave this place where the smoke blows black
And the dark street winds and bends.
Past the pits where the asphalt flowers grow
We shall walk with a walk that is measured and slow,
And watch where the chalk-white arrows go
To the place where the sidewalk ends.

 Yes we'll walk with a walk that is measured and slow,
And we'll go where the chalk-white arrows go,
For the children, they mark, and the children, they know
The place where the sidewalk ends.

Something happens, alas, when we grow older. We start to lose our connections with things as they are, as they could be, and focus on the negative. There are ills to be cured, for sure, but caring people can and do make a difference every day.

I recently came across this article:

Poverty has grown everywhere in the U.S. in recent years, but mostly in the suburbs. During the 2000s, it grew twice as fast in suburban areas as in cities, with more than 16 million poor people now living in the nation's suburbs — more than in urban or rural areas.

Elizabeth Kneebone, a fellow with the Metropolitan Policy Program at the Brookings Institution, says this shift in poverty can be seen in Montgomery County, Md., right outside the nation's capital.

"Montgomery County is one of the wealthiest counties in the country," she says, noting the streets lined with luxury apartments, big homes and crowded restaurants. "But it also has a rapidly growing poor population."

Kneebone, co-author with Alan Berube, of a new book from Brookings, Confronting Suburban Poverty in America, says poverty in Montgomery County has grown by two-thirds since the recent recession. That means 30,000 more residents living below the federal poverty line — about $23,000 for a family of four.

That doesn't buy much in a suburban area with a high cost of living. By some estimates, a family of four in Montgomery County needs more than $80,000 a year to meet basic needs.

Hidden Among Affluence

Kneebone says, around the country, the suburban poor live in low-income and working-class neighborhoods. "But it's also occurring in places we think of as more affluent," she says. "And, in fact, it may be even more hidden there because we don't expect to find poverty in those communities."

On a tour of Montgomery County, Kneebone stops at one place where the growth in poverty is not a surprise: Manna Food Center in Gaithersburg, where about two dozen people are lined up for food.

One of them is Polly Maxwell, 64, who walks with the help of a cane. Maxwell says she started coming here a couple of years ago. After working 38 years at a local hospital, mostly in medical records, she now lives on disability checks.

But Maxwell says things have gotten way too expensive. She spends half of her income on the $800 a month rent for her efficiency apartment.

"What you were making in two weeks when I was working, that's what I make a month," Maxwell says. "I mean, it's hard. And I just never thought it would be like that. So, you have to get used to that, you know. Some of your money lasts a month, sometimes it doesn't."

And she's hardly alone. This center, like food pantries across the country, has seen its caseload double since the recession.

Kneebone says Montgomery County is fairly typical. Suburban poverty has grown nationally because low-income families moved from cities — or other countries — in search of better schools, affordable housing and jobs. But she says it's also about people like Polly Maxwell — long-time suburbanites who have gotten poorer.

"And the Great Recession was particularly severe — widespread job losses, many of them concentrated in suburban communities hit hard by the collapse of the housing market and the loss of construction jobs and related services," Kneebone says. And even though jobs are coming back to the suburbs, she says many pay too little to make ends meet.

Kneebone says even social services and charities have been slow to recognize the shift in need. Most of their resources still go to the nation's cities, where there's a long history of serving the poor.

Shifting Focus Beyond The City

The nonprofit Mary's Center has been providing medical and other help to the poor for 25 years in the Washington, D.C. area. But until recently, all of its facilities were located in the city. That changed in 2008, when it opened a site in Montgomery County, in an area that serves many immigrants. It opened another suburban center last year.

"We were figuring out that when we were over there at the other sites that we have in D.C., there was a lot of population from Maryland who were traveling from here to there," says Zulma Aparicio, site director of the two suburban locations. "And they were paying fares for the bus, metro and all of this. And now they continue paying, but it's closer."

Brookings' Elizabeth Kneebone says that transportation is a big issue for the suburban poor. Everything is so spread out, it can be hard to get where you need to go to meet basic needs, especially if you don't own a car.

But Montgomery County is trying to take steps to address the problem. The county's Neighborhood Opportunity Network operates three one-stop shops for struggling families. Pearline Tyson, the network's program manager, says the county opened the three centers in neighborhoods it knew had been especially hard-hit by the recession.

"They knew that some people would be intimidated by going to a [bigger] regional center to apply for benefits. Especially people who had never received benefits before or who were not familiar with government services," Tyson says.

Instead, the neighborhood centers are intimate and accessible. One is located in Gaithersburg, in what looks like a typical suburban office park. But it's filled with non-profits and social service agencies, instead of businesses. People who come to the center are assigned a county worker who helps them navigate what can be a labyrinth of benefit programs and charitable services.

For Akouavi Davi and her husband, who came here from West Africa, it's been a godsend. "I'm so happy, because I know I have someone to help me now," she says.

The family had been getting by on its own until a back injury forced Davi to give up her job at Wal-Mart. Then their daughter left their small grandson, Joshua, in their care, and now, only her husband works, as a security guard.

"We have electricity problem. We have apartment problem. I have health problem, I don't have insurance," Davi says.

And to complicate matters, she doesn't drive. The family recently moved from a neighborhood further out in the county, where there are no buses, to a place near the center, where there are plenty.

Kneebone says when you're poor, geography matters. Low-income residents can spend long hours trying to get services — time that might be better spent working, or going to school. She says at least this county is trying to adjust. Many have yet to do so.

"We're still thinking about poverty where it was in 1964 when President Johnson launched the War on Poverty. The reality on the ground today is just very different," Kneebone says.

And that reality, she says, is unlikely to change if people don't know that it's there.

(back to me)

I have written about this before. There is a real problem coming. As property values in aging suburban areas continue to decline, we will find that there is not the revenue required to keep the infrastructure up to date. We sprawled so rapidly and so far that we didn't take into account the bills that would come due in fifty years. Now, it's fifty years on, and we are having to do expensive things to keep these areas going, at the very time when there is less money to take care of it with.

Further exacerbating the problem is the fact that serving these areas with transportation alternatives is unfeasible. So you get more cars driving on more roads, but the cars themselves are in poorer condition, requiring more expensive upkeep. And their inefficiency is another impact on the household budget, with rising fuel prices continuing to bite.

The solution is not easy to find. People moving into inner city areas for various reasons have driven property values up, causing the shift indicated in the article to become accelerated. Inner city areas have been traditionally the less desirable places, but their higher density meant that transit options were easily available, and the infrastructure improvements were not as costly per unit (higher density means more houses served off fewer linear feet of infrastructure). As these places become more chic, attracting younger folks with more money to spend, the gentrification that takes place is exacerbated. Poor folks are shuffled out to the rapidly declining suburbs.

It's going to be interesting to see how things shake out in the next 20 years. 

What is it that you REALLY want?

This is a difficult question to answer. I have a 15 year old son, and his wants revolve around food, sleep, and gaming. I was very much the same way when I was his age. I might have thrown a date in there, too. Eventually he will get his driver's license and the wants will include something with a motor with which to accomplish said dates.

My wants, as I noted, were very much the same when I was that age. I was quite egocentric - the world seemed to revolve around me, and when it didn't I felt lost, hurt, or discouraged. Everything SHOULD revolve around me. After all, I am the most significant actor on the stage of my life.

As I grew older and hopefully more mature, my priorities changed. Suddenly, people other than myself became more important to me. I wanted to make them happy. Sometimes that meant denying myself of things that would have made me happy. Beginning with my wife, and expanding to my children as they came along, I found myself often putting immediate gratification off in the name of lasting harmony, peace, and seeing that other's wants were met first. Because ultimately, what makes me happy, what I TRULY wanted, was not whatever immediate gratification could bring, but the lasting, enduring happiness that comes through a successful, peaceful life.

A community can often act in the same way. We have disparate needs, wants, goals, and desires. This has not only to do with the way we provide services for the different groups in our society - movie theaters, skate parks, restaurants, schools, etc. - but in the very nature of the community itself. The way a community provides for all of these needs helps to develop the essential character of the community. It makes a place desirable to stay not just for the short term, but for generations.

Careful planning means to take a step back. To look at our community as a whole and try to meet the needs and wants of everyone. This is not always easy. First one must know what the various and sundry groups in the community really want. This means planners must listen. This is especially true for those groups whose needs are not being met, whose voices have not been heard, and who otherwise are disengaged from the process of community building. It is easy for planners to listen to those voices who speak the loudest and most frequently. Listening to only those voices can distort a planner's view.

A planner should then take the input that's given, put it against best planning practices learned by training, education, and experience, and formulate a plan that will best match the needs of as many as possible, balancing the differences and always seeking the highest and best community development.

Planners should also constantly and relentlessly evaluate what is being done and how well it works. This is important not only in one's own community, but in the region, nation, and world in general. Not everything being done in other places will be a good fit. However, things being tried in other places may help improve what is going on locally. And planners, being local, can adapt the innovation to the wants of the community. Further, as these wants change over time, a careful planner stays abreast of these changes and adapts accordingly. For example, 20 years ago no one would have thought that a skate park was desirable. Now, they're not only places for kids (and adults!) to gather and enjoy each other, they are showcases of the community's interest in young people and in providing such places for everyone. And this is a good thing.

Here in Beaumont, we have a dynamic, progressive community that is growing and prospering. There are nearly 120,000 people who live here, all of whom have real wants that deserve to be addressed. I am looking forward to getting to know as many of them as I can to make sure the plans we put in place serve the people well for generations to come.

Get on the train, man...

This morning as I was making the trek into work, I heard (perhaps ironically) the following:

http://www.npr.org/2013/04/30/179992119/re-training-los-angeles-car-culture

The history of mass transit in America is interesting. Starting from the early days of people pulling trolleys through town with horses - eventually these would be put on rails so their constant traffic didn't disrupt the pavement/cause ruts, and would ultimately become motorized and/or electrified to provide surface light-rail trolley systems - to the buses and trains we use to day, it's been a (forgive the pun) difficult ride.

The early days saw a need for urban rail systems because people lived close in town and needed to get around. These places were cheap, efficient, and friendly. In Booth Tarkington's The Magnificent Ambersons, it is related that:

There were the little bunty street-cars on the long, single track that went its troubled way among the cobblestones. At the rear door of the car there was no platform, but a step where passengers clung in wet clumps when the weather was bad and the car crowded. The patrons—if not too absent-minded—put their fares into a slot; and no conductor paced the heaving floor, but the driver would rap remindingly with his elbow upon the glass of the door to his little open platform if the nickels and the passengers did not appear to coincide in number. A lone mule drew the car, and sometimes drew it off the track, when the passengers would get out and push it on again. They really owed it courtesies like this, for the car was genially accommodating: a lady could whistle to it from an upstairs window, and the car would halt at once and wait for her while she shut the window, put on her hat and cloak, went downstairs, found an umbrella, told the "girl" what to have for dinner, and came forth from the house.

The previous passengers made little objection to such gallantry on the part of the car: they were wont to expect as much for themselves on like occasion. In good weather the mule pulled the car a mile in a little less than twenty minutes, unless the stops were too long; but when the trolley-car came, doing its mile in five minutes and better, it would wait for nobody. Nor could its passengers have endured such a thing, because the faster they were carried the less time they had to spare! In the days before deathly contrivances hustled them through their lives, and when they had no telephones—another ancient vacancy profoundly responsible for leisure—they had time for everything: time to think, to talk, time to read, time to wait for a lady!

This is all very interesting, and over 100 years old. The Magnificent Ambersons was published in 1918, and Mr. Tarkington was writing of an age gone by, but not terribly distant. The novel (which is really quite good) then goes through the days of the early automotive revolution and it's impact on the society and family. The main character cannot reconcile himself to the realities of the future (as represented by the coming of the automobile) and finds himself longing for a past that is at once gilded and shining, but also never really as he understood it in the first place. At the end of the book, he is struck down in the street by a car and winds up in the hospital to recover.

We've done that to ourselves. We've been lulled into thinking that we are dependent on our cars. And we've constructed our world to reinforce that thinking. It was not always that way, and it need not be that way forever. There are aspects of our world that are made much better by having easy and convenient access to cheap personal transportation. Yet, the costs of such ease and convenience continue to mount. Soon, and maybe the process is beginning already, we will realize that the balance falls in favor of other transportation options, different lifestyles, and perhaps a bit of inconvenience in the name of self-preservation and the continuance of our society.

Cities like Los Angeles developed rapidly and around the automobile. As we look to the future, it is important to think about how the realities of the world shifted 100 years ago, and how we can shift them again to reflect priorities we face now.

OK, I'm back!

So it's been a while... I decided that I would continue the blog under different auspices. I am rather proud of the work I've put into this blog, and I'm eager to continue to share. While my thoughts wont specifically be about any particular city any more - other than wherever in the world I may happen to be - I hope to be able to add some ideas to the vast world of information out there that will help inform discussions and interest.

My thoughts - as ever - are my own, and I don't want to reflect on anyone or anything other than myself. I am solely responsible for the content of these blog posts.

I recently started working as the Senior Planner for the City of Beaumont. It's an amazing place, one where I'm very excited to jump in and really see what good I can be a part of. There is so much going on here! It's quite overwhelming. Yet, as the saying goes - it's not the ocean that drowns you, but the puddle. I've launched my little skiff out on the open sea and I'm excited to see what the future holds.

More thoughts will follow in the months and years to come! I hope you'll stay tuned (and I hope that I'm somewhat interesting, at least!) and feel free to comment.

All good things...

This will be my last post on this blog. I have accepted a position with a nearby municipality, and thus I will not be able to be a part of the planning efforts in Mont Belvieu the way I have in the past.

I want to thank all of you for the kind words and interest over the past 5+ years. It's been a wonderful experience for me and my family, and I'm so very grateful to have had the chance to work with you, to serve you, and to learn and grow myself. The things I've learned here will be valuable as I continue my career, and I hope that I've made things in Mont Belvieu just a little better as well.

Thank you again, everyone. It's been a real pleasure.

Whoa...

Sometimes you come across something that just blows you away. I recently read this article:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2013/01/16/169511949/a-mysterious-patch-of-light-shows-up-in-the-north-dakota-dark

This kind of thing is just amazing to me. It's been known for a long time that people - human beings - have a significant impact on the natural environment. While much of the impact can easily be written off as relatively benign, the visual impact of the oil and gas exploitation in North Dakota provides a stunning reminder that not everything we do to our world is good for it. Or us.

I believe that we have an opportunity to be good stewards of the world we've been given. Surely these resources are too valuable to waste in this manner. We are literally burning away our future in the name of convenience and profit. I think this is incredibly short sighted, and our posterity will not thank us for what we've done.

Maps

I have always had an affinity for maps. I don't remember exactly when it started, but I remember in grade school when the teacher would roll down maps from the big, curtain-shade set attached to the chalk board. I would get excited by what was there, what we were about to discuss, and the places we would go.

As an adult, I recognize the practical importance of maps. Having a map to guide you on a road trip is not only useful for planning the trip, but can be life saving when you are lost or headed the wrong direction. But there is also a power in a map - even a road atlas - that helps to inspire... Looking up far away places and dreaming of what these worlds would be like... It's really just as fun now as when I was a school boy.

Now, of course, we have incredible technology. I have a GPS unit in my car which gives me different options for my route (fastest route, most freeways, least (?) freeways, avoid toll roads). My wife's unit is more modern and has instant traffic updates and gives her suggestions about how to route her trip around the traffic hold up. The GPS unit works by receiving signals from satellites in space. The more satellites that one can receive signals from the more accurately one can triangulate one's position in space. The accuracy is something like 10 feet. This is absolutely stunning. These satellites can track your position, your relative speed, your direction, and thus guide you along your way. The traditional road atlas is almost obsolete.

Another blow to the traditional road atlas is Google Earth and other online mapping services. Google Earth is my favorite. The thing is absolutely stunning. With just a few clicks and by using the zoom function on your mouse, you can visit anywhere. ANYWHERE. Most of the world also has been driven and photographed - at least from the road - in a 3D environment where you can look around in all directions. You can follow the road, essentially walking/driving down roads you've never been down, or visiting places you've been.

Maps continue to be important, but as the technology advances, the way we look at the world changes, and the maps adjust themselves accordingly. Further, the function of the map is evolving as well. Linking various data to geography can be instructive, such as showing where drought is happening, where population is trending, and where sicknesses appear. Linkages can then be formed that help guide decisions about policy and where action needs to be taken.

We live in a world of rapid changes. It can be hard to find one's place in it all. But as we look to make the technology work for us, we can become empowered in ways that are helpful and innovative.

A new year...

Happy New Year, everyone!

I hope that 2012 was prosperous and successful for all of you.

As we look forward to 2013, there are a number of projects that are coming to completion and a number of others that will take off.

Eagle Drive is coming right along. The southbound lanes are open beginning at around the post office and it's lovely. The traffic light is in operation at the Lakes of Champions intersection, and as one who lives down there, I appreciate the break it affords me in the traffic. This will also help as we move school traffic in and around the area. Eagle Drive will be completed soon - prior to the opening of school next fall.

Speaking of the schools, Barbers Hill ISD is looking to build a new building to the east. This is on some property the ISD already owns that extends beyond the existing Perry Drive. As a result, the school, City, County, and local industry, are all working together to fund an extension and expansion of Perry Drive that will ultimately connect Eagle Drive to FM 565 east. The County is working with the State on the FM 1409 extension from FM 565 north to IH-10, and further down to FM 565 south. All of these projects are slated to begin very soon and are targeted to be completed for the 2014 school year. The school opening is a bit of a moving target, however, so stay tuned for updates on that.

Other projects that are winding up include the sewer improvements we've completed with GLO disaster recovery funds. These improvements, as I've noted in past posts, will make it possible for us to withstand future major events (hurricanes) better. While these projects are mainly not visible (those who live along the streets affected have seen their driveways taken up while the sewer lines were put in), the effects of having these improvements in place will be felt in an event. One of the major problems we had in Hurricane Ike dealt with the power outage to our sewer lift stations. The projects we have been working on will reduce the dependence on electrical power for lift stations by half, and provide emergency generators to the remaining lift stations. We will be in a much better position to recover more quickly and resist negative impacts of future storms due to the $4 million we've used from federal funds (only a very small local contribution has been put into the projects).

So stay tuned! 2013 is shaping up to be another exciting year here in Mont Belvieu!