Category Archives: Land use & development

The East-West Divide in Loudoun Broadband

Western Loudoun trade-off: views like this for quality broadband.

From an article in today’s Loudoun Times-Mirror: 70% of the world’s Internet traffic reputedly passes through eastern Loudoun County, which has emerged as a world-class hub of fiber-optic trunk lines and data centers. Yet less than 20 miles away, 30,000 inhabitants of western Loudoun have lousy Internet access.

“We just can’t get high-speed Internet,” said Loudoun resident Erin Weaver. “We have Wildblue for our Internet. Due to the fact that our Internet comes from a satellite, when it rains heavily or snows heavily we can easily lose our service.”

Loudoun may be the wealthiest county in Virginia, and one of the wealthiest in the country, but the laws of economics still prevail. The county has enacted severe density restrictions in western Loudoun to protect it against the suburban blob emanating from neighboring Fairfax County. But low-density settlement patterns are unprofitable for telecommunications companies to wire. The revenue stream is too thin to cover the cost of running cable.

I can understand the frustration of western Loudoun residents. But, you makes  your choices, and you lives with ’em. Enjoy your bucolic countryside. But don’t ask anyone to subsidize your Internet connections.

Key Fiscal Concept: the Private-to-Public Investment Ratio

It’s not “density” that makes the Ballston area of Arlington County such a fiscal success but the ratio of private-to-public investment.

Charles Marohn, founder of the Strong Towns movement, is frequently queried if there is an ideal density for communities of a particular population and size. In “The Density Question,” he uses the question as a springboard to address a topic that really matters, the long-term fiscal sustainability of counties, towns and cities.

Marohn’s answer: Density is a useless metric. Forget about it. “Density is not our problem or our solution. Insolvency is our problem. Productive places are the solution.”

Say you own a $200,000 house. How much would you be willing to pay for all the communal infrastructure — the streets, sidewalks, arterials, interchanges, pipes, treatment plants, traffic signals, water towers, and so on — that adds to its value?

What if I said your total bill was $200,000? Would you pay it? I’ve been asking people this exact question for the past two weeks and have yet to have anyone who didn’t immediately say “no, there is no way.” And, of course, nobody would pay this. If the house is worth $200,000 and my additional cost of maintaining the infrastructure to allow me to live in that house is an additional $200,000, then that’s a really bad investment.

What if the total bill was $100,000? $20,000? Only when the number gets down to $10,000 and below, writes Marohn, are people unanimous in their willingness to pay for supporting infrastructure.

I think this is a reasonable thought process and it points to a powerful conclusion. At a property value to infrastructure investment ratio of 1:1, everybody walks. Nobody sensible is going to invest $200,000 in infrastructure in a property and have it end up being valued at only $200,000. What’s the point? …

If your city has $40 billion of total value when you add up all private investments, sustaining public investments of $1 billion (40:1) is a doable proposition. Public investments totaling $2 billion (20:1) starts to be risky with outside forces of inflation, interest rates and other factors beyond your control starting to impact your potential solvency. …

At the end of the day, we’re talking about building cities that make financial sense. … Let me deliver the tragic news that demonstrates why discussions of zoning, new highways, high speed rail across America, recreational trails, decorative lights and every other fetish of the modern planner/zoner is a sad distraction from our urgent problems. I’ve now done this analysis in two cities – one big and one small – and for a $200,000 house in either of these cities, the once-a-generation bill for your share of the infrastructure would be between $350,000 and $400,000. …

When private investment is exceeded in value by the public investment that supports it, wealth is not being created, it’s being destroyed. The wealth destruction is rarely evident because there are so many subsidies and cross subsidies between federal, state and local government, and so much maintenance is deferred into the indefinite future, that nothing is transparent. But the system is not sustainable.

“Our cities are going to contract in ways that are foreseeable, but not specifically predictable,” says Marohn. “Yet most are still obsessed with growth and the ‘progressive’ among us, with issues of density.”

Bacon’s bottom line: Density is relevant insofar as it shapes the private vs. private investment ratio. As a rule, higher density development requires less infrastructure per unit of housing or business than lower density development. But Marohn is quite right to say that we shouldn’t fixate on density — it’s a means to an end, which is evolving toward a more favorable ratio of private to public investment.

Until we get this basic accounting right, I don’t see how there’s much chance of achieving long-term fiscal sustainability.

What the Obama Giveth, the Trump Taketh Away

Slash and burn

The federal budget sequestration may have kept a lid on escalating federal budget deficits, a good thing, but it was a disaster for Virginia’s economy. The cap on federal spending hammered a Northern Virginia economy built largely around the Pentagon. The ascension of Donald Trump to the presidency signaled a possible return to the region’s glory days as the new president promised to increase defense spending by $50 billion.

But the president has created massive uncertainty with a vow to slash discretionary spending in civilian programs and bureaucracies. The Washington Post is all in a dither:

The cuts Trump plans to propose this week are also expected to lead to layoffs among federal workers, changes that would be felt sharply in the Washington area. According to an economic analysis by Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics, the reductions outlined so far by Trump’s advisers would reduce employment in the region by 1.8 percent and personal income by 3.5 percent, and lower home prices by 1.9 percent. …

Trump’s emphasis on defense spending might provide a buffer for Northern Virginia, although, as noted previously on this blog, there are some within his administration who believe that the Pentagon civilian bureaucracy needs to be whacked down to size in order to free more resources for fighting forces. Under a serious effort to rebuild the U.S. Navy, Hampton Roads’ military bases and shipbuilders could be big beneficiaries.

We can’t say anything with certainty until Trump releases the details of his plans later this week. But at this moment in time, it looks like the new budgetary policies could be a mild plus for Virginia with boosts in defense spending offsetting cuts in other areas. Conversely, Maryland and Washington, D.C., with their large non-military exposure, could be in for a world of hurt

Adding to Washington’s woes…. The metro area’s job performance in 2016 has been revised downward. Reports the Washington Business Journal: “The D.C. region added 55,600 jobs in 2016, according to final data released Tuesday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics — about 16,800 fewer than the agency had initially counted.”

“We are talking slashing and burning several different agencies on the discretionary, non-defense side. That could have a pretty chilling effect for the local economy,” said Clifford Rossi, a professor of the practice at the Robert H. Smith School of Business at the University of Maryland-College Park.

Rossi agreed that the revised job growth numbers reveal an economy that was weaker than it originally appeared, and that the federal spending cuts proposed by Trump could have a compound effect on the regional economy.

Bacon’s bottom line: Actually, the loss of 1.8% employment and 3.5% income is no worse than what dozens of other metros experienced in the last recession. But have compassion! Washington has never been through anything like this before.

(Hat tip: Rob Whitfield)

Twilight of an Era in Alexandria

Eric Terran, a 39-year-old architect, is doing something that almost no one in the City of Alexandria is doing anymore: building a detached, single-family residence. Last year he purchased a lot zoned for single-family residential for $230,000, and now he’s erecting a 3,300-square-foot house on it, reports Michael Neibauer with the Washington Business Journal.

Construction of detached, single-family dwellings has almost come to an end in Alexandria, where the inventory of lots is fast disappearing. As Neibauer notes:

Alexandria ended fiscal  2016 with 9,131 single-family detached homes, the exact number it counted at the close of fiscal 2015. In fact, only 12 new homes — not including tear-downs, which do not add to the city’s inventory — have been built since 2010. Save for infill and tear downs, Alexandria is largely built out.

I have no doubt that Neibauer has done his reporting and knows what he’s talking about, but his numbers don’t quite jive with Alexandria’s building permit data, seen above, which I took from the Homefacts.com website. According to that data set, permits issued for single-family housing since 2010 numbered in the hundreds. Admittedly, the overwhelming majority of permits was for 5+ unit, multi-family dwellings, which is broadly consistent with what Neibauer is saying.

Rather than get hung up on explaining the statistical discrepancy, however, I want to focus on the larger truth, which is the transformation of development patterns in Alexandria. The overwhelming preponderance of new housing construction in the city consists of multi-family housing — apartments and condominiums. Indeed, 2013 and 2014 showed new housing construction running at a torrid pace — faster than at any time since 2001.

I’m not intimately familiar with Alexandria, but I did visit downtown several months ago and observed a lot of recent mixed-use development. My superficial impression is that Alexandria is allowing developers to build a lot of the right stuff. The new development is preserving the walkability that made Old Town Alexandria and environs such a special place.

In 2010, the city achieved an all-time population high of 140,000, and has added population since then. As the city continues to grow, new houses like Eric Terran’s will become an endangered species. Newcomers will be living in apartments and condos.

Update: Michael Neibauer contacted me to explain the discrepancy I alluded to. Eric Terran is building a detached single-family dwelling. Although there are many “single-family dwellings” being built in Alexandria, they are row houses — not detached single-family dwellings.

Unplanned Obsolescence: Fairfax County’s Office Parks

Aging, outdated, not within walking distance of anything.... 75% of Fairfax County's commercial/industrial real estate is obsolete.

Aging, ugly, outdated, not within walking distance of anything….75% of Fairfax County’s office space is obsolete.

There is some scary data hidden in Fairfax County’s budget numbers. Back in 1990, commercial/ industrial property comprised 26.7% of the county’s total real estate property tax base. Revenues from high office valuations gave the county leeway to keep the tax rate low — great for homeowners. But the commercial/ industrial share has declined since then to 19.12%, which puts Virginia’s largest political jurisdiction in a bind as county officials prepare the Fiscal 2018 budget.

That commercial/industrial crucial ratio has been known to jump around, depending upon market conditions. The 26.7% number, the highest rate recorded, came only seven years after the lowest rate recorded, 16.12% in 1983, according to a County Executive Budget Presentation published in February. So, things can change. But there is reason to think that the ratio will stay low for several years more.

The office vacancy rate in Fairfax County runs around 20 million square feet out of 116.4 million square feet. Meanwhile the Metro Silver Line is spurring new construction as employers seek Class A office space with mass transit access. Almost 2 million square feet are under construction in Virginia’s largest office center, Tysons, and nine major applications with 9 million square feet are under review.

While the new construction is good news for the Fairfax tax base, here’s what’s not: The executive presentation quotes the Fairfax County Economic Development Authority as saying that 73% of the county’s office space is obsolete.

I’m not sure how the EDA defines “obsolete,” but it sounds ominous. I’m guessing that it means the buildings are aging physically, need re-wiring for state-of-the-art telecommunications, and/or have antiquated layouts incompatible with collaborative work styles. Furthermore, I’d hazard a guess, the office parks reflect a ’70s- and ’80s-era autocentric design, which means they lack the walkable ambience that Millennial employees are looking for these days.

It’s one thing to invest millions in modernizing an office building in a desirable location; it’s another investing millions to update a building in an office park where no one wants to work anymore. I would hypothesize that a large percentage of the county’s commercial/industrial office buildings will continue to get older and more out-of-date. Rents will decline, property values will decline, and the county tax base will continue to erode.

Let this be a warning to other suburban counties across Virginia. Unless they can figure out how to reinvent their old office parks as walkable, mixed-use districts where people these days prefer to work,  they, too, will find themselves heirs to obsolete office parks that leech value and undermine their tax base. The difference is that Fairfax County could see a revival if President Trump succeeds in ramping up defense spending. Henrico, Chesterfield, Virginia Beach and other jurisdictions will have no such luck.

(Hat tip: Andrew Roesell.)

American Commutes Are Getting Longer

Graphic credit: Washington Post

Commutes have gotten longer in the past five years, reversing a ten-year tend in which they got shorter. So says the Washington Post based on the latest American Community Survey and Gallup polling data.

Even more discouraging for anyone hoping for less congestion, less gasoline consumption, fewer CO2 emissions and better public health, extreme commuting of 90 minutes are more is increasingly the most rapidly of all (by 8% in 2015 compared to the  year before) while the shortest commutes (less than five minutes) actually declined 2%.

The Washington Post data is national, and we cannot assume that the same trends are being replicated here in Virginia. In a cursory search this morning, I could not find long-term trend numbers for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in the Old Dominion but Virginia Department of Transportation data indicates that inhabitants drove 2.0% more in 2015 than in 2014 — 226.4 million miles. One year may or may not mark a trend.

Graphic credit: Washington Post

If there’s any consolation in the numbers, it’s that telecommuting continues what seems to be a slow, steady rise. This trend does not seem be correlated,  however, with length of commutes or vehicle miles traveled. Instead, the persistence of the trend probably reflects continued improvements to technology, increased deployment of broadband and growing acceptance of telecommuting in the workplace.

Longer commutes were not supposed to happen. Cities were revitalizing, suburbs were urbanizing, Millennials were shunning automobiles, developers were building more walkable communities, and states were investing in mass transit. But commuting defied expectations. The American people have confounded the experts and pundits (including me).

The Washington Post quotes Brookings Institution researcher Adie Tomer as saying suggesting that jobs are de-densifying, forcing people to drive longer distances, and suburban jurisdictions continue to develop low-density housing. Assuming that analysis is correct, the question is why. Frankly, I haven’t been following the urban-development blogs like I used to, so I don’t know what spin the Smart Growth people are putting on the data. And, sadly, no one in Virginia seems to be taking much notice.

Update: I corrected the percentage increase for Vehicle Miles Traveled in Virginia between 2014 and 2015. The correct percentage increase is 2%. Hat tip to alert reader Carol Bova.

Three Land Use Trends to Watch

Construction booming in Tysons despite 17.5% office vacancy rate.

Three articles today may help us divine the future of residential and commercial development in Virginia:

Rebound of the exurbs? For many years, I was committed to the proposition that metropolitan development had reached a tipping point in which the forces favorable to urban re-development were stronger than the forces driving suburban sprawl. The exurbs — low-density tract development on the metropolitan fringe — seemed to be in full retreat as market preferences shifted toward walkable, mixed-use development in central cities and inner suburbs.

There still seems to be an unfulfilled demand for walkable urbanism, but I may have been to quick to write off the exurbs. Jonathan Fox, a principle at the Fox Group, argues in the Washington Post that median home prices in Washington’s inner suburbs flat-lined in 2016 while prices in outlying communities such as Marshall, Warrenton, Lorton and Middleburg have experienced double-digit increases in median home prices and strong gains in cost per square foot.

“As home prices and the cost of living continue to increase in Washington,” writes Fox by way of explanation, “there will be more demand for affordable housing which is often found in farther out regions of the counties.

My question for Fox: Is he focusing on real estate prices in the oases of small-town walkability in outlying communities — Warrenton, for instance, is highly walkable — or does his analysis include the surrounding tract development? If so, are walkable communities out-performing tract communities?

Tysons redevelopment is booming. But… The Tysons area may have a 17.5% office-vacancy rate, but re-development is going gangbusters. Traditional supply-and-demand logic does not seem to apply, says Gerald Gordon, president of the Fairfax County Economic Development Authority, as reported by Inside Nova.

Tysons tenants are engaged in a “flight to quality,” moving from older buildings to new ones with the latest amenities. “The new space is more expensive, but it sits right on top of a Metro station,” Gordon said.

But redevelopment away from the Metro stops may prove a challenge. “We’re going to have to work hard just to stay in place,” Gordon said. “When I first got here, office users were taking an average of 265 square feet per employee. Today, it’s anywhere between 80 and 140. So you have to bring in twice as many jobs to fill the same space.”

Moral: As employers figure out how to use less office space — more collaborative space, more mobile office technology, more “hoteling” — high commercial vacancy rates will continue to be an issue. There will be a lot of obsolete office space on the market.

Bifurcation of retail. Everyone knows that Amazon.com and other online retailers are gutting the traditional retail industry. But that doesn’t mean everything will be purchased online. People still like to shop as part of an entertainment or social experience. My wife’s cousin calls it “retail therapy.” A related phenomenon is what I call “girlfriend shopping” — shopping as a bonding experience. While Amazon.com makes shopping ridiculously easy, it’s not what you’d call an enjoyable experience.

Tom Goodwin, head of innovation for Zenith Media, argues in Bloomberg that physical retailers can create a competitive advantage that trumps price and convenience.

“Shopping is the world of adding experiences,” he writes. “It’s the interactive perfume lab in Selfridge’s, the selfie opportunities in Harvey Nichols, the Hardware club experiences in Harrod’s or the extravagant laboratories of Le Labo. Coffee shops seem to have learned this, it’s the unnecessarily long wait, the drama of the brew, the theatre of the leather bound menu in Intelligensia coffee.”

Market forces will push retailers in one of two directions — more frictionless, low-cost shopping online or more experience-rich shopping in the physical world.

Bacon’s bottom line: I don’t get the sense that local governments in Virginia have absorbed two important lessons. First, technology has rendered obsolete the space-intensive offices of yesteryear, and the demand for commercial space is shrinking. Old office parks will rapidly lose their market appeal. Counties will see their tax bases shrivel. Second, retail activity continues to move moving online, which is rendering shopping centers obsolete and redundant. Again, counties will see their tax bases shrivel.

The future belongs to those who can adapt. Office activity will shift to centers of walkable urbanism; access to mass transit is a major bonus (although, in an Uberized world, I’m not persuaded it is absolutely essential). Retail activity likely will do the same. When people want to enjoy shopping as an experience, they want to enjoy the experience outside the store as well. Strip shopping centers and aging malls don’t have much to offer.

Nobody knows where all this heading. (That includes your humble futurist and prognosticator). Things are changing too fast for planners and politicians to figure it out. How will self-driving cars alter the equation? How will Transportation-as-a-Service change the way think about where they live, work and play? There’s lots of speculation, but nobody knows. We won’t know until the market figures it out. The communities that prosper will be those that are the most flexible, adaptable and willing to experiment with new forms of transportation and land use.

Owens & Minor Goes for Millennials, Walkable City

Owens & Minor wants Millennials,and Millennials want 15-minute, livable communities. Graphic credit: Institute for the Future

Good economic news for the Richmond region: Medical supply giant Owens & Minor Inc. announced plans Thursday to open a client engagement center in downtown Richmond that will employ 500 people. Jobs will average about $53,700 in annual pay.

In making the announcement Governor Terry McAuliffe made much of the fact that Richmond competed against 60 other cities in a year-long search process. Less was made of the fact that Owens & Minor, which is located in the Mechanicsville suburb of Richmond, chose to locate in the central city rather than one of the region’s outlying counties.

The reason? “We want to attract the millennial generation,” CEO Cody Phipps told the Richmond Times-Dispatch. “We did our research. The millennial generation is going to be 50-plus percent of the workforce in the next few years, and they want to live in urban areas. They want to be downtown. They want to work in a state-of-the-art space. We like that we can draw from the universities around here.”

Owens & Minor will make Riverfront Plaza in downtown Richmond its newest home.

Owens & Minor will make Riverfront Plaza in downtown Richmond its newest home. Photo credit: Richmond Times-Dispatch

I don’t know who conducted Phipps’ research, but I know of one outfit in town that does specialize in generational marketing — The Institute for Tomorrow, which is affiliated with the Southeastern Institute of Research (SIR). (I worked for SIR about ten years ago.) Two days before Owens & Minor’s announcement, Managing Partner Matt Thornhill tweeted presciently, “Winning communities of tomorrow are 15-minute livable communities.”

By way of elaboration, he blogged about recent research conducted for the Virginia Secretary of Transportation. In a survey of 600 people around the U.S. who had just moved or were considering moving more than 100 miles, four out of five agreed with the statement, “Having access to stores, restaurants, and services close to my home (within about 15 minutes) is very important to me.” Almost as important was living withing a 15 minute commute of work.

It is often said that Millennials want to live “downtown” where it’s hip and cool and there are coffee shops and microbreweries. According to a recent Urban Land Institute study, though, only 37% of Millennial consider themselves to be a “city person,” wrote Thornhill; 36% classified themselves as “suburbanites” and 26% as “small town/country” people.

While there is nothing inevitable about Millennials wanting to live and work downtown, they are “hard-wired to be in community with each other,” Thornhill observed. “Thanks in part to doing school projects in teams from their middle school years onward, Millennials like to collaborate and trust in decisions made by the wisdom of the crowd. … They want neighborhoods where they can walk, bike, and use transit to get around.”

This community mindset, opined Thornhill, will drive the growth of “activity centers” of 15-minute livable communities. Activity centers don’t have to be in traditional cities (although most are).  “Builders, developers, urban planners, and government officials are now catching up to the changing preferences of consumers and looking for ways to in-fill activity centers across their metropolitan landscape.”

Thornhill stops his analysis there. But as I think about the Owens & Minor decision, it’s not clear that urban planners and government officials actually have gotten the message. While most of the City of Richmond fits the definition of a 15-minute walkable community, there are only flyspecks of walkability in neighboring Henrico and Chesterfield counties. In Henrico County the one area that potentially has the critical mass to compete with downtown Richmond, the Innsbrook Office Park, was rezoned for urban mixed use back in 2010. But re-development has stalled for more than six years due to inflexible application of the zoning code.

Absent a dramatic change of thinking and practice in the suburban counties, it looks like the future of the Richmond metropolitan region belongs to the city. Everything old is new again: Richmond possesses the key elements of walkability — moderate density, mixed uses, grid streets and timeless architecture — inherited from a past era of urban grandeur. The counties are stuck with suburban sprawl. Expect to see more headlines like Owen & Minor’s in the region’s future.

Suburbs Not So Simple

Virginia suburbs have diverse patterns of development.

Virginia suburbs broken down by percentage of population in each suburban type.

A difficulty in analyzing the economic dynamics of the “suburbs” is that land use and development is far from uniform. Recognizing that the term encompasses a wide range of human settlement patterns, the authors of “Housing in the Evolving American Suburb” broke down suburbs into five major types.

Established high-end. These have high home values and established development patterns. They tend to be built at higher densities and located closer to the metropolitan core. Residents resist new growth.

Stable middle-income. These neighborhoods tend to be older and located closer to the urban core. They exhibit a wide range of home values.

Economically challenged. These locations have lower home values and have seen little to no population growth in recent years. They may have aging infrastructure or under-performing services.

Greenfield lifestyle. These are newer, developed within the past ten to 15 years, and closer to the suburban fringe, where the bulk of new community development is occurring. They tend to have some land still available for new development.

Greenfield value. These, too, are located at or close to the suburban fringe, attracting value-oriented home buyers. Developing over the past ten to 15 years, they often reflect a “drive until you qualify” pattern.

The distribution of population between suburban types is similar in Richmond and Hampton Roads, as seen in the table above. But the sprawling, faster-growing Washington region is distinguished by a significantly higher “greenfield value” population. The drive-until-you-qualify phenomenon is in strong in Washington’s Northern Virginia suburbs, impelled by development restrictions and high housing prices in the core jurisdictions.

Bacon’s bottom line: I suppose this taxonomy is marginally interesting, but I don’t see how it guides either homeowners or county governance. The same study examines home buyer preferences (see previous post). How do these suburban types match against those preferences? The study doesn’t say. How does the trajectory of housing values match against those preferences? It doesn’t say. How should county officials alter their comprehensive plans to better align housing/community types with market demand? Again, not much to say.

What Home Buyers Are Looking For

Home buyers still favor housing attributes that favor the suburbs

Source: “Housing in the Evolving American Suburb.” Home buyers still show strongest preference for housing attributes associated with suburban living.

For all the talk of urban renaissance in cities across Virginia and the United States, first-time home buyers find that new or existing suburban homes offer the best match for their preferences and budget, reports the Urban Land Institute (ULI) in a new study, “Housing in the Evolving American Suburb.”

While American’s urban cores are experiencing investment and population growth after decades of disinvestment and flight, the action is still in the suburbs because that’s where most of the developed land is. And, while members of the Millennial generation may value walkability and access to public transit more than previous generations, they still put the highest value on square footage, larger lots, and access to good schools and public services.

Nevertheless, there is likely a deficit of walkable urbanism compared to the demand for it, and that scarcity creates a premium for houses in walkable neighborhoods, the study argues.

In the coming years, efforts will likely continue to make at least some suburban areas more urban, with walkability to restaurants, stores, and other conveniences, combined where possible with access to good transit. Some of that development will be close to existing urban areas, and some will be close to existing or newly built mixed-use modes that include restaurants and stores. Some of the suburban development will deliver a more urban experience for a wider range of households. … Many large master-planned communities are including urban town centers as a component of their development.

Bacon’s bottom line: So, the race is on in metropolitan regions like Richmond. Who can move faster to attract affluent households that pay the most in taxes and enjoy the greatest ability to live where they want — the City of Richmond or the suburban counties? The city has the walkable neighborhoods, proximity to cultural amenities, and access to mass transit. But the counties have larger lots and houses, lower taxes, and access to better public schools.

Both cities and counties in Virginia have the potential to offer the best of both worlds. The City of Richmond could gain an enormous competitive advantage if it could improve the quality of its public schools. Sadly, that seems to be an intractable task. Conversely, Henrico and Chesterfield Counties could gain a competitive advantage by zoning for walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods. Although the counties have allowed islands of walkable urbanism to take root, the pace of change is glacially slow.

Both urban and suburban jurisdictions face institutional rigidities that prevent them from achieving maximum potential in the early 21st century. What a shame.