ADVICE FOR THE DONKEY CLAN AND FOR BEN’S FED

On 25 August the WaPo head line read: “As midterms loom, Democrats (the Donkey Clan) work to shore up faltering recovery.”

By ‘recovery’ it is assumed that the headline writer was suggesting that the Donkey Clan is hoping that ‘something’ will get ‘the economy’ back to Business-As-Usual in time to make citizens feel good by 2 November.

Forget that, in will never happen. Jobless stagnation is the very best one can hope in the immediate future. In spite of Richard Florida’s optimistic story title noted below, Fundamental Transformation takes time.

On 26 August the WaPo headline read: “Fed policy foggy as the economic picture clouds”

It would be nice if the Fed raised the interest rates. Low interest rates help some big financial Enterprises at the top of the Ziggurat but punishes those who saved over the past two decades.

But in the larger context:

How about a Fed policy and Donkey Clan platform planks based on HONESTY and on REALITY?

Jim Bacon sees Boomergeddon looming in the distance. There is a problem much closer at hand.

Car SALEs and home SALESs have pulled the economy out of the last seven recessions.

Not this time. Too many Wrong Size Houses in the Wrong Locations (which, by definition, are accessible by Autonomobiles) are the ROOT cause of The Great Recession AND the economic hurt that will follow, what ever it is called.

It is NOT just risky home loans to poor credit risks…

It is NOT just wild gambling on futures and derivatives driven by the unfounded assumption that house values will always go up…

It is NOT just that home owners used the speculative value as debit card to fund private debt…

It is NOT just that Agencies have increased public debt and tossed good money after bad to prop up shaky loans on dwellings in dysfunctional locations…

It is NOT just that Agencies, Enterprises and Institutions acted as if home ownership was an unquestioned good thing…

It is NOT just that those Wrong Size Houses in the Wrong Locations are only accessible by Autonomobile…

It is NOT just that Autonomobiles that most citizens can afford require cheap materials and cheap energy to build and run best on gasoline…

It is All those things and many more.

But mainly it is continuing economic policy that depends on unsustainable patterns of consumer consumption – Mass OverConsumption.

And it is about the location and pattern of human activities at, above and below the surface of the planet.

As noted in The Shape of the Future, LOCATION matters and national, state and municipal policy, programs, regulations and education programs have been guided by the Geographically Illiterate for 65 years.

It is time to pay the piper.

Sales of exiting homes are at a 15 year low. Sales of new houses are at a 40 year low.

CNN says: “Say goodbye to the McMansion.” That SHOULD surprise no one since Chris Nelson projected in 2006 that if the then current trends continued there would be 22-million Wrong Size Houses in the Wrong Locations by 2030. It is the demographics stupid (and the location and the economy.)

The housing news is BAD for home owners and land owners. However, declining house prices is NOT a bad thing in the long run. It will make shelter ‘affordable’ and that is GOOD but Only if the homes are ALSO ACCESSIBLE. See SYNERGY’s work over the past 15 years on the Affordable and Accessible Housing Crisis.

Home ownership itself is not ALWAYS a good thing for reasons Richard Florida spells out in The Great Reset. There is a short version of Florida’s perspective in “The Roadmap to a High-Speed Recovery” in the 12 Aug 10 The New Republic.

According to some like James Altucher home ownership is BAD thing. His 19 Aug 10 column in DailyFinance lists seven reasons. Many will not agree but Altucher provides food for thought. It is very clear home ownership is NOT for everyone.

But the BIG economic issue going forward is not just housing and Autonomobiles – it is human settlement patterns and what has been driving dysfunctional shelter locations. The question is:

IN THE NEW REALITY, WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO PROPERTY VALUES?
Well, it depends on LOCATION. Home values and property values have changed trajectory more significantly in the last three years than at any time since data has been available. In general, the farther from the Centroid of New Urban Region Cores and the farther from the Zentra of all Urban agglomerations, the more house values and property values have fallen and will fall. The reasons and research on this topic follow, but to put the issue in historical perspective:

For over 100 years Countryside land values have been irrationally inflated by speculation about the amount of land that can be sustainably and productively devoted to Urban land uses. As larger and larger percentages of the population shifted to Urban sources for their livelihood the unfounded assumption was that more and more land would be needed for Urban activities. See Chapter 1 Box 2 of The Shape of the Future for the reasons why between 1800 and 2000 the population increased by 50 times but the amount of land needed for daily human activity as a percentage of the total area of the US DECEASED by a factor of 10.

Much of the unfounded speculative increase in ‘value’ was based on the assumption that any land one could access with an Autonomobile would be a potential location of Urban land uses. The speculation accelerated in the 1920s when there was extensive growth in Autonomobile ownership. The speculation exploded in 1956 with the funding of the Interstate and Defense Highway System. See “Interstate Crime” Column # 50 28 Feb 2005 accessible from the RESOURCE page at www.emrisse.com

Now there is a new resource that allows anyone to check out location of places citizens can live if they want to lower transportation costs and have a smaller (and cheaper) carbon footprint http://abogo.cnt.org

But wait, these are the SAME places Florida says the Creative Class WANTS to live. AND, it turns out it is the ONLY place those at the bottom of the Ziggurat can afford to live.

Put another way, it is the ONLY place that society can afford to support Urban citizens no matter where they are in the economic Ziggurat.

At SYNERGY we have been harping for over 25 years on the need to use Vacant and Underutilized land inside The Clear Edge and we have the position papers to prove it, so does Jim Bacon. Just so no one forgets, Mr. Bacon and EMR have also said – and continue to say: So long as they pay their fair share of location-variable costs citizens should be able to live where ever they want. A main driver of settlement pattern dysfunction are the hidden and neglected subsidies and externalities.

In addition, municipal regulations and many other forces have prevented the rational evolution of human settlement patterns. The what, how, why and WHERE is spelled out in The Shape of the Future. The misguided regulations and other forces have raised the cost of the built environment – shelter, employment, services and infrastructure – to the determent of citizens at all scales. In Clusters, Neighborhoods, Villages, Communities, SubRegions and Regions citizens are not well served by the existing land use CoMixture, the lack of diversity and unsustainability.

The simplistic “Abogo” tool linked above is still in Beta form but working out the bugs will just make it stronger.

What it shows is: If you are in a Household that derives its primary support from Urban
activities:

Live and work INSIDE The Clear Edge.

In fact the closer to the Centroid, the better. That is true for all scales of Urban places from the Cores of New Urban Regions to the Zentra of small Urban agglomerations in the Countryside that are the components of Balanced But Disaggregated Communities.

Housing and other components of the built environment to necessary to support Resilient, Sustainable Regions will continue to be sound investments. In fact inside R=5 the residential values dipped and rebounded over the past three years. “Regional” averages mask what has happened in the past three years in the higher radius bands. When the value of Urban ‘improvements’ goes down, the hot air will leave the speculative Countryside bubble that has been expanding for over 100 years.

This will help those who want to acquire land for contemporary farming close to the market but it will wipe out property tax as THE source of income for municipal jurisdictions. That is not a bad thing in the long term since revenue to support Agencies at all scales of governance should come from user fees and from taxes on consumption, not taxes on property. That is another story for another time.

SYNERGY has recently applied Regional Metrics and newly available data to document the current trajectory of house values. “Current” means through yesterday. The results are just what you would expect after reading Bill Lucy’s new book Foreclosing the Dream or any of the material produced to date by PROPERTY DYNAMICS, a program of 1000 Friends of Virginia’s Future.

Suffice it to say, that the invisible hand is FAR ahead of the current crop of Agency ‘planners’ (including those at the FED) and the political spinners in both dominant Clans. Strangely enough, the current market trajectory is NOT ahead of the best Regional thinking in the period 1960 to 1973. Inexplicably, the OPEC Oil Embargo resulted in the leadership of Agencies, Enterprises and Institutions to shift human settlement patterns in EXACTLY the wrong direction. You guessed it, that is yet another story for another time.

SYNERGY is working on a list of strategies that Community and SubRegional Agencies, Enterprises and Institutions can implement to achieve a sustainable trajectory for themselves and their constituents (the voters), owners (including stockholders) and members. There is a lot that ‘special’ places like Greater Warrenton-Fauquier can do but time is running out and it will soon be too late to change existing policy, regulations, programs, projects and education.

Now for that Donkey Clan and Ben’s Fed advice:

Stop pretending something – ANYTHING – will bring back the good old days.

Humans have burned through millions of years of stored natural capital, not just petroleum but concentrated minerals, marine resources, top soil, fossil water, a protective atmosphere.

There must be a shift from Mass OverConsumption to REAL conservatism – aka, conservation.

The focus must be on rational conservation objectives such as energy conservation, land conservation, air and water conservation, agricultural land conservation, species diversity and not exacerbating climate change.

The Wealth Gap must be closed. Does anyone need to be reminded that the major component of the wealth of the vast majority fo citizens WAS the ‘equity’ in their home? Larry G’s comment on Jim Bacon’s post is right on by the way.

The idea that making the rich richer will result in more trickle-down is DEAD. Things have been getting worse and worse for the majority for nearly four decades. It is time be honest.

There are strategies to address systemic problems which the majority to can come to embrace in intelligently presented: stop mineral dissipation, stop top soil loss, stop ground water depletion, recycle, reuse and share. Live on energy income, not on capital.

The party is over. Citizens deserve an opportunity to succeed, not a free ride and entertainment while they wait for the gravy train. There are adults in the US that will appreciate honesty.

If the Donkey Clan abandons those at the bottom of the Ziggurat they will not just run the federal, state and municipal agencies into bankruptcy, they will lose their base.

Elephant Clan has abandoned those in the middle of the Ziggurat. It is now faced with the defection by the Anger of Ignorance crowd.

By continuing Business-As-Usual, the Donkey Clan will lose the bottom of the Ziggurat to populist demagogues as has happened in Latin America and there will be no one in either Clan for those in the middle to support. A five Clan future?

The Donkey Clan must lay out the course toward a sustainable trajectory and be honest, be real. Or become a minor fifth Clan.

There are less than 10 weeks to sell a new message. Some Clanspersons may lose the next election but the whole Clan will lose its soul AND its constituency on the current path.

The times ahead will be difficult but there will be some entertainment too:

Let us see how fast the ‘property rights’ advocates who own speculatively inflated land stop complaining about how “government” is preventing them from “doing what they want with their property” and start whining for “government” to provide price supports for their speculative interests in land?

The Consumptionists have had the bull horn for 30 years. It is time for a new and sweeter tune from more refined instruments.

EMR


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

45 responses to “ADVICE FOR THE DONKEY CLAN AND FOR BEN’S FED”

  1. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Pretty sweeping prognosis, Professor!

    We look forward to getting the details on the Radius Band by Radius Band analysis at our next seminar.

    In the meantime we just read “Restricting New Infrastructure: Bad for Business in California?” in the Spring 2010 (just arrived) issue of Access. Wow!

    They looked at 1.5 million Enterprises in California over the last 15 years: Where they were started, where the moved (if they did), where they expanded, what impact the location of new infrastructure (roads, airports, etc.) had on location and move decisions and a lot more.

    Result? Almost nothing the Commonwealth (or municipalities with which we are familiar) is (are) doing to ‘attract’ business has ANYTHING to do with what the vast majority of Enterprises actually do.

    I know it is California but, the data is overwhelming:

    Get folks that now live in your town to start businesses…

    When you add the insights of import replacement and internal bounce:

    Forget about chains and multi location franchises.

    CJC

  2. Larry G Avatar

    I'm troubled by the unproven simplicity of wrong-sized house in wrong-location.

    If a guy makes a 100K a year in Fredericksburg – he might well build or buy a 2500 square foot home – 3 miles from where he works – and he can bike or walk or use transit to get back and forth but even if he uses a car – it's not worse than 90% of the folks who live – and work in NoVa.

    But if that guy with the job in NoVa decides to move to Fredericksburg and buy a similar sized house right next door to the Fredericksburg guy but instead of a 3 mile commute, he has a 53 mile commute then – according to EMR – he's clearly in a wrong-size house, wrong-location situation.

    I just want to point out that it's not the house – because right beside the commuter's house in another almost identical that is right-sized and right-location.

    So – it's not the house – it's the commute.

    If it were JUST the house – then seemingly, one could do a simple data analysis of the houses that are involved in the meltdown and be able to very convincingly produce a map showing that the majority of distressed homes are, indeed, wrong-size and wrong-location.

    I do agree with this:

    " revenue to support Agencies at all scales of governance should come from user fees and from taxes on consumption, not taxes on property. "

    this is why I do support tolls on commuter roads and I support using some of the profits from the tolls to provide more transit options.

    but governance… Fredericksburg has cluster, door level governance but again – people live there that don't work there and instead commute far away to their jobs.

    So you have the right kind of governance – regardless of where people actually work.

  3. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    Good post, EMR. Both the Donkey Clan and Elephant Clan are totally addicted to economics and politics of Mass OverConsumption. I see no prospect of that changing any time in the near future. The only debate that is occurring is which party/clan will do a better job of perpetuating that failed paradigm. There seems to be zero chance that the new people in Washington, D.C., next January will understand the deeper issues we are facing.

    To this point, the main critics of Mass Overconsumption have come from the left/green movement. In Boomergeddon, I developed a critique of Mass Overconsumption from a conservative/libertarian perspective. It will be interesting to see if those ideas get any traction.

    As an aside, I have finally bought Richard Florida's new book, "The Great Reset," so I'll soon understand the references you make to Florida's latest thinking.

  4. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Hydra, you are really going to enjoy the irony of this article in the Washington Post today by Roger Lewis.

    Lewis is arguing for the need for government subsidies to provide more housing in urban areas for middle class families with children!

    Particularly read the last few paragraphs.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/26/AR2010082607208_pf.html

    So much for "sustainability" inside "The Clear Edge" as Ed Risse likes to call it.

    "Smart Growth" will never work if it has to be subsidized for the middle class.

    The real answer of course is "FREE GROWTH" which can only happen when "property rights" are respected in a free society. That means no zoning. (All you land socialists out there, please do not write back about oil refineries next door as such things would be governed by nuisance laws. To get your head around the concept of land use freedom, think of NO RESIDENTIAL ZONING.)

    If a community were free to grow, competition among property owners would keep the price of land down and we would not face the problem Lewis writes about. Low density neighborhoods next to Tysons Corner, for example, would long ago have been redeveloped into different types of apartment communities catering to different household types.

    "Free Growth", or what I would term "Voluntary Smart Growth", is the only way to sustainably allocate the scarce resource of land.

    Ironically, the 1926 Supreme Court Euclid v. Ambler case upholding residential zoning laws referred to apartments as "very often…mere parasites…interfering by their height and bulk with the free circulation of air and monopolizing the rays of the sun which would otherwise fall upon the smaller homes…."

    In lauding the virtues of low density single family sprawl, the Supreme Court noted "that the development of detached house sections is greatly retarded by the coming of apartment houses…."

    We couldn't possibly let more people voluntarily decide to live in greater density near their employment, why homeowners might lose that breeze on their front porch and the sky would be darkened. The horror!

    Of course the nonsense emanating from the Supremes did not end there. "…the segregation of residential, business, and industrial buildings will make it easier to provide fire apparatus suitable for the character and intensity of the development in each section…."

    Apparently the Supreme Court was an early adopter of Risse's concept of "location variable costs" and a "sustainable trajectory" for development and it turns out its all about saving money on the siting of fire stations! We need more segregated sprawl simply because those fire engines are too pricey! Who knew.

    This is the kind of junk thinking one gets with the statist regulatory mindset that despises what would otherwise develop organically from the free choices of hundred of millions of Americans.

    Congratulations to Ed Risse for opposing property taxes which otherwise encourage land to be wasted on less productive uses just to feed the tax man.

    Freedom Works

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Here is the URL for the WP Lewis article:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/26/
    AR2010082607208_pf.html

    It got truncated in the last post.

  6. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I thought this has been one of EMR's best posts, even though I don't agree with all of his points. Location, location, location and mass over-consumption have some true ring to them.

    I do find a big problem with several people's arguments that it is feasible for people to live near where they work on a long-term basis in a place such as the Greater Washington, D.C. area. There is very little job stability long term. Many people have multiple jobs in a number of locations in the course of five-to-ten years. Factor in spouses, life-partners and significant others, and I submit most people are back to commuting. It may not be 50-mile commutes, but it could easily be 15 miles.

    My hypothesis is that the larger the area and the greater the employment opportunities, the harder it gets to live near one's work.

    TMT

  7. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I found this post because of the reference to Abogo turned up on Google. I have been following Abogo because when it is refined it has real potential as an education vehicle for folks like “Hydra.”

    My guess: “Hydra” (cute handle for a spammer!) owns land that he had hoped to develop or sell to developers. I will bet it is in the ‘red zone.’

    Jason Rogers

  8. Larry G Avatar

    I'm surprised that Bacon or Groveton did not stumble on this:

    " Microsoft Picks Virginia for Major Data Center"

    Microsoft has selected a site near Boydton, Virginia for a major new data center project, with plans to invest up to $499 million in the rural community in the southern part of the state. The company plans to build a cutting-edge data center that will serve as the East Coast hub for Microsoft’s online services."

    http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2010/08/27/microsoft-picks-virginia-for-major-data-center/

    There are some interesting aspects to this project.

    First – it's an initiative oriented to rural Va.

    Second, there are only 50 jobs involved right now but The Gov has committed about 5 million in a battle to wrest this project from North Carolina.

    Third – is the organization that is at the root of the initiative – The Mid-Atlantic Broadband Cooperative –

    …. By providing open access to an advanced fiber-optic network, we enable our members to bring broadband access to unserved and underserved areas—advancing the prosperity of rural localities in Southside Virginia. In fact, over only the past three years, MBC has experienced a double-digit growth rate, creating more than 2,200 jobs and helping to contribute $300 million of investment to the region.
    MBC also provides the leadership and technology infrastructure necessary to assist in economic revitalization by providing high-capacity optical transport services to attract businesses to the area. Thanks to the powerful network we have in place, there is an abundance of room to grow, both on a regional basis as well as on our long-haul network from Atlanta, Georgia, to Washington, D.C."

    http://www.mbc-va.com/about_mbc/index.html

    all kinds of conflicting concepts are swirling around my head.

    are they creating more wrong-size homes in the wrong-location or is this TMT's fabled creating of "more places"?

    Is it wrong for the business leaders in this area to form their own organization to seek a better future for their rural area and their kids or have they screwed up the "plan" to send their kids to NoVa for jobs and stop messing up the grand plan of abandoning the rural… what does EMR call it? the land outside of the clear edge?

    I'm so confused……

    help me help me

  9. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Jim Bacon:

    Thank you for the feedback. As usual we are on the same wave length. Now that EMR has a copy of “Boomergeddon” we will check out your argument on Mass OverConsumption from the ‘conservative’ end of the spectrum.

    It seems so simple: CONSERVATISM equals CONSERVATION, NOT CONSUMPTION.

    On the way home from the farmers market, having read what Bernanke said in Jackson Hole with my cappuccino, I had a thought:

    [But first:

    Dan Kemmis (Mayor emeritus of Missoula, Montana – an acquaintance, but not a friend of EMR) opens his inspiring book “The Good City and the Good Life” with a scene from the farmers market on plaza in front of the Northern Pacific depot. There was no farmers market in Missoula the four years EMR lived there, but that is another story.)

    My visit this morning to the farmers market in Greater Warrenton was every bit as inspiring.

    Talked to Fahmah about his grand-son-in-law getting new burners for our grill, talked to Regina about borrowing pots to use when we give Sue The Pie Lady day lilies this fall (got some peaches from Regina as well), talked to Regina’s son about the Saints / Chargers game (he missed it) talked to Sue about the recipe she will use for our Thanksgiving pumpkin pie (and got a key lime pie), talked to the Waterpenny Farm summer worker about the buffalo mozzarella, fresh basil (from Fox’s Herb Farm) and tomato (from Waterpenny) salad that we will make for supper… There were other stops and observations too numerous to mention… Just had to get that down…]

    Now that insight from the trip home:

    THEY (all of THEM except for you and a few others) ARE LOOKING THROUGH THE WRONG END OF THE TELESCOPE.

    THEY are looking at the national trade balance and the stock market and the auto sales and the …

    As we noted in the post, keeping the interest rate low helps the ‘national numbers.’ It helps H/P find $1,880, 000,000 to outbid Dell for 3 Par but it does not help Joe get $18,000 to put up a solar green house so he can have fresh tomatoes, basil and blueberries to go with the turkey at Thanksgiving.

    While they focus on Wall Street and the national numbers, Main Street, and the Main Street Neighborhoods, Villages and Communities are dying. Actually it is at the Dooryard and Cluster scale where the faces are the longest and they will get longer…

    You are right there is no prospect of anyone being elected in the current Clan system having any idea of what it will require to achieve a sustainable trajectory with a happy and safe citizens.

    EMR

  10. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    TMT said:

    “I thought this has been one of EMR's best posts, even though I don't agree with all of his points. Location, location, location and mass over-consumption have some true ring to them.”

    Thank you, TMT

    EMR will try to clarify some things.

    “I do find a big problem with several people's arguments that it is feasible for people to live near where they work on a long-term basis in a place such as the Greater Washington, D.C. area.”

    EMR suspects that is because, like many observers, TMT does not see the potential of fine grained diversity at the Cluster, Neighborhood, Village and Community scale. It now exists now where so it is hard to imagine. But a robust system of shared-vehicle systems serving functional human settlement patterns can achieve far better results with far lower costs.

    “There is very little job stability long term.”

    That has been true in the past but will be less true in the future. The chance to move up by moving out will be more limited. There has been a huge margin of error funded by the consumption of Natural Capital. Charge the true, full costs and there is less choice but with realistic expectations, there will be happier and safer citizens. That is what civilization is all about.

    “Many people have multiple jobs in a number of locations in the course of five-to-ten years.”

    They have in the past but with fewer options in the future and the growth of income being less important – because it is less possible to achieve in a society with sustainable levels of consumption – the flux will decrease. The rate of change is marginalizing more and more citizens. Unless there is some way to pay for a Joel Garreau brain boost for those at the bottom of the Ziggurat, society cannot afford stability AND continued acceleration of the pace of change.

    “Factor in spouses, life-partners and significant others, and I submit most people are back to commuting.”

    Some will need to move, and move jobs, but if there is shared-vehicle commuting and if every station-area is always moving toward Balance, the opportunities will be two, three or four station stops away in either direction. See Richard Florida on why owning a house is not always best. But there are other reasons for a stable home location / environment and that has to be weighted more than it has in the past when just jumping on to the next job seemed the best option.

    “It may not be 50-mile commutes, but it could easily be 15 miles.”

    With a robust shared-vehicle system and with diverse pedestrian environments we would guess 5, not 15. But if someone wants to pay in time and fare for 15 minutes they should have that choice.

    Right now there is no choice.

    More important NO ONE realizes that they have to start making far different decisions.

    MOST still believe that if they just vote for the right person that person can deliver a Mobility and Access System that allows THEM to go where they want, when they want…

    “My hypothesis is that the larger the area and the greater the employment opportunities, the harder it gets to live near one's work.”

    It IS harder. The existing systems are not providing Mobility and Access, Affordable and Accessible Housing and a Balance of J / H / S / R / A. That must change. Fundamental Transformations. It will be easier with fine grained diversity at the Cluster, Neighborhood, Village and Community scales.

    The big things I tried to get across were:

    Plan to live and work in the Core.

    The value of scattered Urban land uses and the land they occupy will continue to go down except where citizens take action to create Balance at smaller scale and give up the idea of living here and working anywhere.

    Hope that helps.

    EMR

  11. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Freedom Works:

    I see nothing ‘ironic’ about Roger’s column. While EMR does not always agree with Roger’s Vocabulary, there is nothing in this column that contradicts the main post. In fact it reinforces it.
    Thank you for posting the link.

    “Lewis is arguing for the need for government subsidies to provide more housing in urban areas for middle class families with children!”

    As you know if all the location variable costs were fairly allocated, there would be NO need to subsidize the dwelling units that Roger is advocating be included in the Urban fabric.

    Two things to keep in mind:

    1) Less than 20 percent of the Households – and far fewer of the new Households projected over the next two decades – have ‘school age children’ in the Household.

    2) When all the sources of support and service are factored in, attached and multi-family dwellings are the best places raise children. Exclusive use of Single Household Detached Dwellings as a good place to raise children is a Myth perpetrated by Scotts Lawn Care Products, Inc.

    “So much for "sustainability" inside "The Clear Edge" as Ed Risse likes to call it.”

    What Roger says does not detract from the need for functional and sustainable settlement patterns inside The Clear Edge. It reinforces it.
    “"Smart Growth" will never work if it has to be subsidized for the middle class.”

    As Roger points out there are already HUGE subsidies for all housing and the more expensive the house the more it is subsidized if it has a mortgage.

    “The real answer of course is "FREE GROWTH."

    Your essay / diatribe on “free society property rights” has elements of truth and fact, but just enough to make it misleading and dangerous: Fodder for the Anger of the Ignorant movement.

    The only way settlement patterns can evolve from NonUrban to Urban without Agency participation (in addition to Agency regulation of common law nuisance) is for all owners to put their NonUrban property interests into a common pool at the Alpha Community scale and they draw back “rights” to Urban interests including some shared rights to common land.

    EMR has seen this voluntary process work well at the Dooryard scale but not at larger (Cluster, Neighborhood, Village or Community) scales. That is why there is a requirement for Agency participation, as there is with all health, safety and welfare issues in a civilized society.

    “Congratulations to Ed Risse for opposing property taxes which otherwise encourage land to be wasted on less productive uses just to feed the tax man.”

    EMR has supported this position for 40 years.

    EMR

  12. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Apparently someone cleaned up ‘hydra’s’ late night comments from yesterday. I signed on earlier and learned that ‘hydra’ thought he had found a way to make money!

    Make a comment, make a second comment betting that the first post will be deleted and then delete the first comment himself (“deleted by author”). How clever. Now that some of ‘hydra’s’ comments have been remove – thank you, by the way – ‘hydra’s’ money machine is not as clear as it was earlier.

    By the way, who pays ‘hydra’ the ten dollars? Or rather who does ‘hydra’ pay the ten dollars because the comment before the bet is still there.

    Can he delete the bet comment and avoid paying?

  13. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Larry said:

    “I'm troubled by the unproven simplicity of wrong-sized house in wrong-location.”

    EMR is troubled by Larry’s inability (fained or real) to grasp the basics of Regional Metrics and the parameters of functional human settlement patterns.

    Larry is aware and well informed on many topics. Why not on this very important topic?

    “If a guy makes a 100K a year in Fredericksburg – he might well build or buy a 2500 square foot home – 3 miles from where he works – and he can bike or walk or use transit to get back and forth but even if he uses a car – it's not worse than 90% of the folks who live – and work in NoVa.”

    GREATER FREDERICKSBURG IS IN THE VIRGINIA PORTION OF THE NATIONAL CAPITAL SUBREGION (AKA, THE NORTHERN PART OF VIRGINIA)

    NO ONE knows where what someone else calls NoVa is located.

    A single 2,500 sq ft houses three miles from the Centroid of the Greater Fredericksburg Beta Community is not a Wrong Size House in the Wrong Location.

    Putting 5,000 new 2,500 sq ft houses within three miles of the Centroid of the Greater Fredericksburg Beta Community would be Wrong Size Houses in the Wrong Location because of the size of the job market in the Beta Community. It would not be possible to create a Balance of J / H / S / R / A with that many new houses. By definition most of the owners would have to leave the Beta Community to seek employment. That was the problem with Lees Hill even though it was not that big.

    See the difference?

    “But if that guy with the job in NoVa [for clarification: with a job near the Centroid of the National Capital SubRegion] decides to move to Fredericksburg and buy a similar sized house right next door to the Fredericksburg guy but instead of a 3 mile commute, he has a 53 mile commute then – according to EMR – he's clearly in a wrong-size house, wrong-location situation.”

    That is NOT EMR’s position.

    The second house is still 3 miles from the Centroid of the Greater Fredericksburg Beta Community and two such houses are NOT Wrong Size Houses in the Wrong Location.

    Now if either guy 1 or guy 2 buys a 2,500 square foot house (or a 4,500 square foot house) that is 10 miles from the Centroid of Greater Fredericksburg and 50 miles from the Centroid of the National Capital Subregion and there are not J / S / R / A in the same Neighborhood or Village for those who can afford the house (regardless of size) then THAT is a Wrong Size House in the Wrong Location.

    EMR

  14. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    “I just want to point out that it's not the house – because right beside the commuter's house in another almost identical that is right-sized and right-location.

    “So – it's not the house – it's the commute.

    “If it were JUST the house – then seemingly, one could do a simple data analysis of the houses that are involved in the meltdown and be able to very convincingly produce a map showing that the majority of distressed homes are, indeed, wrong-size and wrong-location.”

    And that is EXACTLY what the Radius Analysis does.

    Why is that so hard to understand?

    “I do agree with this:

    " revenue to support Agencies at all scales of governance should come from user fees and from taxes on consumption, not taxes on property. "

    Most do in the abstract. It is when it comes time to figure out who pays what that opposition grows, especially from those who want to get elected next year.

    “this is why I do support tolls on commuter roads and I support using some of the profits from the tolls to provide more transit options.”

    That is a different question but if the price is fair and covers the full cost the chances are the decision will be to buy / rent a Unit closer to J / S / R / A/

    “but governance… Fredericksburg has cluster, door level governance but again – people live there that don't work there and instead commute far away to their jobs.”

    Are you daft? The City of Fredericksburg, Stafford County, Spotsylvania County, King George County, Caroline County… All of them have a 18th century municipal governance structure. None have any governance structure above or below the municipal scale. (EMR is aware that in Virginia, Counties do not call themselves ‘municipalities’ but if it walks like a duck…

    “So you have the right kind of governance – regardless of where people actually work.”

    The issue is Balance and Critical Mass.

    EMR

  15. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Later Larry said:

    “I'm surprised that Bacon or Groveton did not stumble on this:

    " Microsoft Picks Virginia for Major Data Center"

    “Microsoft has selected a site near Boydton, Virginia for a major new data center project, with plans to invest up to $499 million in the rural community in the southern part of the state. The company plans to build a cutting-edge data center that will serve as the East Coast hub for Microsoft’s online services."

    http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2010/08/27/microsoft-picks-virginia-for-major-data-center/

    “There are some interesting aspects to this project.

    “First – it's an initiative oriented to rural Va.”

    Boydton is a small cross roads on US Route 58 between South Hill and Clarkville but it is not ‘rural’ There is no ‘rural’ left in VA and if it is a data center it is ON a major internet backbone.

    “Second, there are only 50 jobs involved right now but The Gov has committed about 5 million in a battle to wrest this project from North Carolina.”

    But North Carolina is just across Buggs Island Lake.

    “Third – is the organization that is at the root of the initiative – The Mid-Atlantic Broadband Cooperative –

    “…. By providing open access to an advanced fiber-optic network, we enable our members to bring broadband access to unserved and underserved areas—advancing the prosperity of rural localities in Southside Virginia. In fact, over only the past three years, MBC has experienced a double-digit growth rate, creating more than 2,200 jobs and helping to contribute $300 million of investment to the region.

    “MBC also provides the leadership and technology infrastructure necessary to assist in economic revitalization by providing high-capacity optical transport services to attract businesses to the area. Thanks to the powerful network we have in place, there is an abundance of room to grow, both on a regional basis as well as on our long-haul network from Atlanta, Georgia, to Washington, D.C."

    http://www.mbc-va.com/about_mbc/index.html

    “all kinds of conflicting concepts are swirling around my head.”

    “are they creating more wrong-size homes in the wrong-location or is this TMT's fabled creating of "more places"?

    Try not to confuse yourself. The issue is Balance and Jobs to match Housing. Given what you anyone knows at this point there may not be a single house built. It may convert some 2nd homes to primary homes.

    “Is it wrong for the business leaders in this area to form their own organization to seek a better future for their rural [low density area is an Urban Support Region] area and their kids or have they screwed up the "plan" to send their kids to NoVa for jobs and stop messing up the grand plan of abandoning the rural…”

    “what does EMR call it? the land outside of the clear edge?”

    Outside the Clear Edge around the Cluster-scale Urban agglomeration of Boydton it is the Countryside within the Southside Urban Support Region.

    “I'm so confused……”

    “help me help me”

    Theatrics do not become you.

    EMR

  16. How many tons of Basil do you have to sell to make the payments on an 18 thousand dollar greenhouse?

  17. After they subsidize urban housing for middle class with children they will need to subsidize open space for them to play in, which they will get by razing low class dwellings through eminent domain. Then we can subsidize a decent school system, which we can get by treating union teachers the same way Reagan handled airs traffic controllers.

    And we can subsidize healthcare for all those urban asthmatic children, plus free bottled water.

    We can subsidize their transit system with the excess profits from charging outsize user fees for auto users. The rest will come from a tax on hothouse tomatoes, designed to reduce overconsumption.

  18. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Shared vehicles – many of us who have been working on Tysons Corner issues do support the concept of increased use of shared vehicles. One of the reasons to support HOT Lanes on the Beltway is that it will permit reliable bus service on the Beltway from south of Fairfax County to Tysons Corner.

    Rail will provide some linear shared vehicle services to Tysons. However, the studies indicate that there will likely never be more than 18% or so of the total trips into, and out of, Tysons on the Silver Line. Under current plans, there will be only 9-12 trains per hour (peak period) on the Silver Line. Meanwhile, Orange Line service outside East Falls Church will drop from 14 trains per hour (peak period) to 9-12. As the number of Silver Line trains increase, the number of Orange Line trains decrease and vice versa.

    There needs to be reliable shared vehicle service between Maryland and Tysons and between Loudoun County and Tysons.

    Mandatory paid parking would help reduce the number of SOVs coming into and out of Tysons. But at some point, the landowners will need to push back because their buildings will be less competitive with high paid parking rates.

    TMT

  19. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "If a community were free to grow, competition among property owners would keep the price of land down and we would not face the problem Lewis writes about. Low density neighborhoods next to Tysons Corner, for example, would long ago have been redeveloped into different types of apartment communities catering to different household types.

    This does not ring true. Talk to Tysons landowners. They will tell you that demand for multi-family housing at Tysons is limited. Also, once the sales rhetoric is pealed away, most would likely say that the best location for unsubsidized, affordable multi-family housing is far from Tysons (e.g., Chantilly or Centreville) and, if forced to provide this type of housing, they would want to build it at the fringes of Tysons' 1700 acres – well outside walking distance to rail.

    No or limited zoning is consistent with a free market – in theory, at least. But a free market would never have built the Silver Line through Tysons. The original promise to residents of Fairfax County was that, once the Dulles Toll Road was paid, tolls would go away. Not only will that not happen, but tolls will skyrocket to pay for the Silver Line. This is not consistent with a free market. The feds are paying $900 million to subsidize construction of Phase I of the Silver Line. That is not consistent with a free market.

    I'm no fan of big government, but I'm a bigger opponent of taxpayer subsidies to businesses. And when a business gets a subsidy, it has no reason not to accept the regulatory strings that go with the taxpayer dollars.

    If we had a development model that required landowners to fund whatever public facilities are needed to support whatever level of development they wanted to build and to recover those costs only in their prices, I could see eliminating all zoning except for public health and safety. But we have a system where landowners do not pay for the infrastructure that is needed to support whatever level of development they want to support. And when push comes to shove, they would be in Richmond in mass fighting against a free market with little zoning, but a prohibition against receiving taxpayer support for their projects.

    TMT

  20. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    All good points TMT.

    How many tons of basil to pay off an $18,000 loan? Not as many as you may think. Good basil sells for around $12,500 a ton. The same greenhouse can raise medical hemp, blue berries and lots of other items that sell for more than hay.

    That is why Prof. Risse is advocting an increase in the number of persons involved in Ag.

    Citizens need to eat, they do not need to flog horses.

    A continuing student of the good professor.

  21. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    TMT:

    The Silver Metro line through Tysons is corporate welfare at its worst. It will require subsidies forever.

    We wouldn't need a subway, or even HOT lanes, to get people into Tysons if more of them already lived there.

    My point is that without residential zoning restrictions, far more housing would have been (and would now be) built in and near Tysons, thereby vastly reducing the number of long distance commuters who are causing the traffic nightmare.

    We need all this transportation infrastructure precisely because zoning regulations prohibited the construction of an adequate amount of housing for the people employed there.

    The demand for multi-family housing in Tysons itself is limited today because the rents demanded are far higher to cover the high land costs and the higher costs of high-rise construction.

    Stick built (wood) apartments are limited to 4 or in some cases 5 stories. They are far cheaper to build (lower cost = lower rent) than the higher density high-rise concrete towers planned for areas at Tysons near the Metro Stations.

    Eliminating residential zoning barriers would produce a supply of land near Tysons at far lower prices that would make it economical to build affordable stick built apartments that would be in demand.

    Wouldn't you rather have people commuting 1 or 2 miles into Tysons instead of clogging I-66 and the Beltway commuting in 15 to 25 miles from Chantilly, Centreville, South Riding, or Manassas, etc.?

    Who needs a subway anyway if you are working within a few miles of where you live? Public policy in the form of restrictive residential zoning regulations forced the residential sprawl and the long distance commuting, not the free market.

    Take a drive 20 miles from Tysons into Loudoun and look at all the apartments, townhouses, and small lot single family developments.

    Maybe some day there will be enough jobs in Loudoun for those residents, but certainly not today.

    If we are ever to achieve the balance that Ed Risse dreams of, we have to remove the residential zoning regulations that prevented an adequate supply of housing near the jobs that are already at Tysons.

    Freedom Works

  22. Freedom
    Works is correct except that removing restrictions in Tyson's also means removing them in Western Loudoun and Warren county where land and homes will still be less expensive. To remove zoning density restrictions only in Tyson's amounts to a huge subsidy to those that live there. Something like that will be needed to offset the higher costs for everything else. Risse points out that considering transportation, cheaper homes or roomier homes at the same price are no. It is a false argument, because it is incomplete. Take that argument, but expand it to the full basket of what people spend on and what they need to spend on. And then see how much disposable income is left.

    I don't pretend to know how to do this, exactly, but no doubt EMR will tell me. I know people who live in tiny urban spaces who have to hire in for services I would never think of buying. They also "escape" several times a year for skiing, camping and bleaching. I know others you could not drag away from home, and the pet horses. I know others who live in enormous, elegant spaces that are mostly to look at: you would be afraid to actually do anything there.

    So I wash my car and my apartment friends take theirs to the detailing shop. I make eight kinds of pickles and they have a choice of dozens at the pricey gourmet shop. Vibrant urban living.

    Who is really better off and who really exists with fewer subsidies.
    ?

  23. Larry G Avatar

    a typical urbanized single family residence will generate about 9 auto trips a day.

    for multiple dwelling less than 20 per acre the trip generation is 8 trips per day and for more than 20 it's 6.

    If you want to assume that 9 trips for single family detached lessens to 6 for multi-family dwellings – you're still left with the shopping, soccer, and other trips and in the end 20×6= 120 trips verses 9 trips for the same acreage.

    who's responsible for the additional road capacity, the added schools, parks and libraries and where will you put them?

    The developers don't want nothing to do with those costs and the folks that already live there are not about to pay higher taxes to provide the additional infrastructure either.

    How do you solve that problem?

  24. Larry G Avatar

    " In fact, such schemes are meant to reduce domestic IT employment as Microsoft and others offer online applications and storage through 'the cloud'. Offshore employees can manage the centers as effectively as on site. And when one server bank becomes too much of a pain, just call a trucker to replace it."

    how is it a 'scheme' and what is the advantage of locating something like that in a rural area rather than an urban area and even though it's managed remotely there are still jobs for maintaining the physical equipment…

    If not that – what – a Kia Plant or hot house nursery?

  25. Darrell -- Chesapeake Avatar
    Darrell — Chesapeake

    What happened to my post? It disappeared.

    Why locate a data center in RoVa. It needs tons of electricity and water for starters. Big lake and a nice rate for power by ODEC, plus a low/no tax rate from a depressed county. A fed/state paid high speed fiber network. Truck drivers and electricians who will work for peanuts. What's not to like?

    The bottom line is there will be few if any high tech jobs created at Boydton because the strategic technology of computing has changed. Hardware has become unimportant in an age of software on demand. Picture Einstein redefining AOL in the same way he did physics.

  26. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Freedom Works – if you got rid of zoning at Tysons, you would see more commercial buildings being built, not residential. I know; I've talked to some of the landowners. Commercial is a better investment and is easier to finance.

    I think Ray is right in that, if one were to eliminate zoning at Tysons, one would need to do so all over the Commonwealth. And land farther from Tysons would continue to be cheaper than land at or near Tysons. If there were no zoning, wouldn't land in Chantilly and South Riding, for example, still be cheaper than land at Tysons? Wouldn't we still see lots of people living far from Tysons because it's cheaper?

    I certainly agree that stick building is much cheaper than high-rise. That's why the landowners fought to keep as much housing as possible farther from the rail stations. Some very expensive condos will be built near the stations. But how many people want to live there and could afford the prices? That worries a number of landowners. There will not be large-scale mixed income housing near the rail stations except as is coerced by Fairfax County. It's too expensive, as you say. And taxpayers are not going to fund subsidies.

    One of the realities that few want to discuss is that Fairfax County is largely built out. Oh there will be infill development. There will be some dense construction built near the rail stations. But there will not be a massive increase in the County's population. To the extent that Metro D.C. continues to grow, much of that growth will be in the outlying areas.

    TMT

  27. "Some very expensive condos will be built near the stations."

    =================================

    Those high price condos will survive because they are being subsidized: with high density zoning, and with proximity to the stations. The stations will be subsidized by auto drivers (and everyone else, if there is such a thing) who may or may not also use Metro, and live in what EMR calls the wrong places.

    The net cost of living and transportation may still be higher than for a typical suburban commuter, in spite of the subsidies. I argue that when prices and other costs (like taxes) are higher, it is a pretty good indication that more resources are being used.

    If you eased zoning in the Tysons area you would not have to ease zoning elsewhere as well, but you would have to give up the argument that those in other areas are not paying their full costs.

    Since ony about 2% Of the US population has transit avaialble, that means that by EMRs definition 98% of us are living in the wrong size house in the wrong location. I don't think he has any standing to make such a definition, or that it will be generally accepted. But mostly I don't see that he has any plan for paying the costs of fixing the "problem".

  28. "How do you solve that problem?"

    ==================================

    Don't allow the people that live there to tell other people what they can and cannot do with their property.

    If those that live there want to keep property empty, then they can buy it and turn it into parkland. If they are concerned about windfall profits, they can develop their own property and take advantage of the "windfall". They will find out it isn't as easy as it looks.

    Neither side is allowed to impose external costs on the other. As a cost problem, this isn;t so difficult to solve: a way can be found to allocate costs and profits fairly.

    The reason this isn't done is that this isn't a cost problem. It is a political one.

    Like Shreck, the existing owners just wqant things they way they used to be. Then they try to pass off controlling other people's property for nothing as "conservation". Defined this way it is nothing of the sort: it is collectivism.

  29. The house problem is the same as the basil problem: if the price is high enough and people are allowed to – they will fill the demand and prices will fall. That is why exclusionary zoning and excessive regulations and fees contributed to the housing bubble, and it is why there is no basil bubble.

    Beelzebub will try to tell you that the basil bubble is the next big thing, like emu, potbellied pigs, beefaloe, minks and poppies. He'll sell ridiculous investments in solar greenohouses with incredible statements like basil sells for 12,500 a ton. Retail, maybe, but not to the guy that raisis it. If you can show me where basil (or anything legal) sells for that price, I'll show up next hear with 400 tons of the stuff. And so will enough others to cause the price to crash.

    I never understood why a solar greenhouse was any different form any greenhouse, thos some are a lot more efficient than others. Surprisingly, the things that makie it "more solar" also make it cheaper: you can buld a heck of a big greenhouse for $18 thousand. Figure $10 to $15 a square foot.

    But our friend will need to boorow or save 3 to four times that amount to have the cash to stay in business. I can introduce him to a number of bankrupt greenhouse owners. They took a much bigger bath than normal houses: they must have been the wrong size in the wrong location.

    He will still have the land equation to solve: if his land and greenhouse cost more than $4000 an acre he has virtually no chance of making a profit. If he puts up an 1800 sq ft greenhouse he'll have 0.04 acre. At two tons per acre he'll produce 160 pounds of basil, and maybe in a green house he can do that four times a year.

    So, one third of a ton times $12,500 = $4000, gross, even if you believe his outragous price assumption. After expenses he will be lucky to have $200. I suggest he not give up his day job. He would be better off importing basil from Chile.

    Risse should stick to urban planning and not give out bad ag advice.

  30. "But we have a system where landowners do not pay for the infrastructure that is needed to support whatever level of development they want to support. "

    =================================
    Neither new landowners nor existing ones. Thats why we hear that residential doesn't pay. That's why businesses and farms pay more than their share.

    We have systemic tax problems and growth tax problems, but money isn't the reason people fight density. They want to keep what they have – even if it isn;t theirs.

  31. If they get 18% of traaffic using Metro in Tysons itr will be either a miracle or a disaster. Even New York only gets ten percent.

    New York taxis carry as many people as Washington's Metro system. Metro does what it does pretty well, but it isn't the answer for everything. At some level, supporting metro by punishing suto users will be counterproductive for business and traffic management.

  32. "It would be nice if the Fed raised the interest rates. Low interest rates help some big financial Enterprises at the top of the Ziggurat but punishes those who saved over the past two decades. "

    =================================

    Wishful thinking not based on reality.

    Those who saved over the past two decades have no more right to expect a return on their investment than those who invested in homes have. Those at the top of the Ziggurat are not borrwing now, because there is nothing to invest in, and higher rates will only reduce what borrowing there is.

    Savers at the bottom can't expect any return if there is no borrowing. And anyway, what the fed does has little effect on what banks pay to savers.

    EMR does not want a return to business and usual and mass overconsumption, so he proposes a high interest rate policy which will prevent a return to (what he perennially sees as temporary) prosperity.

    Ford and GM both sell more cars in
    China than they do in the US. Car sales may yet drive economic recovery. But, since almost all homes are in the wrong places, by EMRs view, there is no way out of the inevitable boomergeddon quagmire.

    According to EMR we should stop mass overconsumption, and reduce even more the incentive to invest (and return anything to those who have been saving for twenty years).

    Not only are we consuming too much we are doing it in the wrong places as a result of 65 years of leadership at everly level by people who are geographically ignorant, compared to EMR. They are are wrong and ignorant, every one of them.

    EMR claims we will pay for this stupidity with lower home prices. Lower home prices are a good thing because it will because it will make homes affordable. Except they won't be affordable because they are almost all in the wrong places.

    But homes in good locations will retain their value and remain unaffordable. "For over 100 years Countryside land values have been irrationally inflated by speculation "… and yet they are STILL cheaper and carry fewer taxes than urban locations.

    Whew.

    And that is just the first part of the circular logic spiral.

  33. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry G:

    But if people are allowed to live within a few miles of Tysons, then those trips will be 1 or 2 miles each instead of 15 or 20.

    The real peak hour traffic problem is caused primarily by long distance commuting.

    Hydra:

    I agree, remove the residential zoning restrictions everywhere.

    If that means there will always be even cheaper housing further out, it would easily be balanced out by peak hour congestion tolling of all major commuter arteries.

    The problem with adding high tolls now is that due to restrictive zoning, we have not evolved a natural organic free market free choice development pattern, nor do we have the ability to due so now as long as the regulations remain in place.

    The Silver Metro line is a massive subsidy to continuing dysfunction.

    If all commuting arteries had peak hour congestion tolling to keep traffic moving, who could complain that anyone was subsidizing anyone else? The tolls would pay for the roads and for capacity improvements. They would be paid for by the people who actually use them, unlike the Silver Line.

    Remember, it is not the Tysons developer who generates the traffic on the Beltway. It is caused by the employees who chose to live in Lorton or Woodbridge or wherever, in most cases involuntarily because residential zoning restrictions prohibited the construction of an adequate supply of housing within a reasonable distance of the job centers like Tysons.

    Drive Spring Hill Road north of Tysons. All you see is large lot zoning and mansions for millionaires for mile after mile. There could be transitional policies established to allow zoning to be controlled on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis where at some percentage level, the neighborhood could vote to eliminate the zoning.

    Within a few years you would see tens of thousand of new housing units practically within walking distance of the jobs at Tysons, or wherever.

    Ed Risse:

    Why are you afraid of freedom?

    No one has a right to a congestion free commute from wherever to wherever paid for by subsidies or artificial restrictions on someone else. Zoning is an artificial construct that has massively distorted our environment.

    What socialism taught the world in the last century is that there are too many individual choices to possibly calculate such that an economy cannot thrive when “production” (substitute “size” or “location”) is determined top down.

    Freedom without subsidy is the solution.

    Freedom Works

  34. Larry G Avatar

    " The real peak hour traffic problem is caused primarily by long distance commuting"

    Not all of it.

    There are 2 million people in NoVa and a good number of them are using the beltway to get to their jobs.

    Beltways have fundamentally changed the way that urban areas develop and settle.

    People no longer consider a place to live within walking or biking distance from the job but rather 15-30 minutes by car.

    We really do not design ped and bike facilities for home-to-work commutes anyhow but rather just for recreation with not much attention paid to what the trail really "connects" or not as it was not designed for that purpose to start with.

  35. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Freedom Works – You appear to disagree that Fairfax County is largely built out. With the county's commitment to open space and existing development patterns, there is not much space in which to build substantial additional housing. One spot that is being tried is near rail stations. I've said my piece on those and won't repeat it here. And there is some room for fill-in development. But even that raises traffic and school issues.

    I think we all agree that high-rise residential at Tysons will be limited. So that means townhouses or garden apartments, under your theory. I think that there would be some demand for more of those housing types. But still a limited demand. And much of the land at Tysons is already developed with commercial buildings, many of which are owned outright or are under long-term leases. Neither Freddie Mac nor the McLean Hilton are likely to come down soon for garden apartments or townhouses.

    If you go beyond Tysons proper, you are into single family homes -some of them quite expensive. I cannot believe that may homeowners would sell their homes, many of which are quite good for commuting. Further, if these homes were sold, they would likely be expensive, pushing up costs for your more dense housing. Finally, adding density creates more traffic, which under Chapter 527 must be addressed. Developers would need to build more roads, which also increases the costs of construction.

    I just don't see how eliminating zoning, while forcing the developers to fund the public facilities needed to support their development does much for Tysons on any count.

    TMT

  36. "The real peak hour traffic problem is caused primarily by long distance commuting."

    ==================================

    This is commonly believed but as far as I can see it is simply not true. Long distace commuters are a fraction of the total and the average commute is only around 25 minutes, which in rush hour probably means `5 miles or so.

    Larry is right, traffic density is more of a problem. Many people who drive 30 milesw to work would barely cut their commute time at all if they lived 15 miles from work, and they would actually increase their commute time if the use transit.

  37. "You appear to disagree that Fairfax County is largely built out. With the county's commitment to open space and existing development patterns…."

    =================================

    Well, yes, but that is two different issues. Marthas Vineyard is near built out — with existing open space and development patterns.

  38. "Much of the unfounded speculative increase in ‘value’ was based on the assumption that any land one could access with an Autonomobile would be a potential location of Urban land uses. The speculation accelerated in the 1920s when there was extensive growth in Autonomobile ownership."

    ===============================

    Aee you actually saying that the picayune number of automobiles availabe in 1905 -1915 were enough to fuel giant specualtive buying of country side land? The first Ford wasn;t even sold before 1904.

    And that this increased in the 1920's? Started in the twenties, maybe. By 1920 Ford had sold a million cars, bet before that they were mostly playthings for the rich.

    World War II saw a large increase in mass transit because employment was high and automobiles were scarce. Autos gave travelers the freedom to travel when they wanted to and where they wanted.

    "After the war pent up demand for for mobility when the war ended and plenty of production capacity as factories turned off the war machine. Many people had saved money because there was little to buy, beyond necessities, in the war years. Workers relied heavily on mass transportation during the war and longed for the freedom and flexibility of the automobile.

    A historian has said that Henry Ford freed common people from the limitations of their geography. The automobile created mobility on a scale never known before, and the total effect on living habits and social customs is endless. In the days of horse-drawn transportation, the practical limit of wagon travel was 10 to 15 miles, so that meant any community or individual farm more than 15 miles from a city, a railroad, or a navigable waterway was isolated from the mainstream of economic and social life. Motor vehicles and paved roads have narrowed the gap between rural and urban life. Farmers can ship easily and economically by truck and can drive to town when it is convenient. In addition, such institutions as regional schools and hospitals are now accessible by bus and car.

    Yet, the effect on city life has been, if anything, more prominent than the effect on the farms. The automobile has radically changed city life by accelerating the outward expansion of population into the suburbs. The suburban trend is emphasized by the fact that highway transportation encourages business and industry to move outward to sites where land is cheaper, where access by car and truck is easier than in crowded cities, and where space is available for their one or two story structures."

    http://l3d.cs.colorado.edu/systems/agentsheets/New-Vista/automobile/

  39. Larry G Avatar

    It was the interstate highway system that fundamentally altered settlement patterns.

    Before Interstates – surface streets extended radially out from the urban cores.

    the radial streets may or may not have been "connected" but until the advent of the interstate – did the following concept of a "belt" designed with the same features – i.e. limited access, no curb-cuts and on and off ramps.

    The original Interstate concept was to "connect" the urban areas AND …actually… go through them.

    Robert Moses was such a person who believed that.

    It was realized that interstates that 'connected' urban areas would have to find a way through or around them if they were to 'connect' the next urban area or for someone to leapfrog over one or more urban areas to get to their destination urban area.

    It became apparent that trying to go through some urban areas was going to be exceptionally difficult and so the "bypass" was brought into the design and it wasn't long after that – that people saw that connecting multiple bypasses would produce a "belt" or "circumferential" road – limited access, no curb-cuts and on/off ramps.

    It is my view that the "connect" and the "belt" aspect of the interstates – fundamentally changed the way that urban areas develop, evolve and expand.

    No matter what one's theory is about what a "good" settlement pattern is or is not – it cannot ignore the reality that beltways exist and have irresistible influences on where people live – and work.

    Interstates and beltways are an undeniable aspect of urban infrastructure.

    To attempt to develop a Master Plan for a place like Tysons without considering the beltway and how the surface streets function in concert with the beltway would be irrational.

    Take a look at why Arlington is suing VDOT and FHWA over HOT Lanes.

    It's because of the anticipated impacts of selling excess HOV capacity to solo-driven cars – bound for Arlington surface streets.

    That implies – that even Arlington has exurban commuters despite it's high density residential.

    It has more jobs that there is available residential so people live in the exurbs and commute there – not only on the beltway, but I-95 – but METRO AND VRE.

    If making Arlington more dense did not stop exurban commutes then what makes folks think that Tysons can succeed at that?

  40. Larry G Avatar

    fiscally as well as physically. Lost to history was the political issue of the cost of the interstate system if it was going to be built through existing cityscapes and have to pay for the right-of-way.

    City Planners were opposed to what they considered to be the dismemberment of integrated communities at great dollar and cultural costs.

    But it was the realization that those who did not have business in that urban area but instead the one beyond it that led to the idea that going "around" was easier fiscally and physically anyhow.

    My main point was not so much about how it came to be as much as the fact that beltways and circumferential interstates came to be and once that happened, how urban areas developed, expanded, evolved including mobility infrastructure – was changed forever.

    And any discussion about optimal settlement patterns and mobility infrastructure that fails to take into account "the" beltway is just simply out of touch with fundamental realities.

    Unless and until – we decide to go back and tear up the beltways – they cannot be ignored.

    At some point anyone who professes to offer insights into settlement patterns and location variable costs essentially has to decide if they are going to accommodate the realities or just engage in "what if" theoreticals.

    1. beltways are not going away ( they are in most urban areas in the world, not just the US)

    2. as long as beltways are a reality – so will the concept of living many miles from where you work be a reality.

    3. the day we run out of "fuel" to commute on beltways is much, much further away than the mere demise of oil.

    At some point – cars will be plug-ins – "fueled" by electricity – generated from coal, natural gas, nukes, solar and wind and who knows what else?

    so the cars will continue to roll up and down the beltways and people will continue to live in one place and feel free to switch jobs in the same urban area and remain in the same home – OR – vice versa.

    Wishing for mobility to be catastrophically altered – as what will be required before "better" settlement patterns can evolve is misguided at best and delusional at worst, in my view.

    I would posit that what could alter the USE of beltways for home-to-work-to-home mobility is how we deal with information – that no longer requires a physical presence or even proximity.

    but goods and services – whether it be new carpets for your home or vet services for your pet or the frozen shrimp for your supper – they'll still be transported via interstate and beltway.

    Your razor blades will never be manufactured by the couple across the street from you nor will you be buying your egg from the neighbor behind you.

    You'll still need electricity and you'll still expect water to come from your faucet and your toilet to flush – and as long as you live in an urban area – these modern necessities of life will require regional (as opposed to "local") infrastructure and solutions.

  41. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry, your last post is one of the best I've seen on BR in sometime.

    I think that, with broadband, we can have a lot more teleworking and virtual companies that, in turn, can reduce commuting mileage some. But the idea that we are all going to live and work in little villages or return to inner cities just doesn't ring true.

    We need to work at the margins. If we could reduce SOV commuter traffic by 10%, we would make huge gains in efficiency and quality of life.

    TMT

  42. Larry G Avatar

    thanks TMT!

    We just have to deal with the realities and beltways are here to stay – and no matter how dense you make the settlement pattern.. people are going to get the best job they can – within a reasonable driving distance via the beltway.

    I would like nothing better than to see this not be the case, but it is and as long as it is – we have to conduct our planning with that reality.

    HOT Lanes may influence this, we'll see but Arlington actually believes the opposite.

  43. by the way – the original interstate system was NOT designed as a way for urban areas to expand and develop.

    The Interstate was designed explicitly to allow people to go from one city to another without getting tangled up in the cities in between.

    The original intent of the interstates – failed – when they allowed interchanges to allow egress to/from the city to the interstate.

    I don't even think the cities themselves wanted the exurban expansion that would follow the interchange exits but land developers saw a way to offer those who worked in the city – the opportunity to not live there but instead to commute to outlying areas.

    Once that happened – the original intent of the interstates was hopelessly corrupted.

    Even to this day – if one hears about a new "reliever" corridor like the mostly defunct Western Transportation Corridor – the pitched battle was over how many exits to allow if the intent of the road was to "bypass" Washington.

    Instead, it became clear that if the road went forward that there would be powerful land-development interests lobbying hard for as many exits as they could get.

    This, in turn, drove those who were convinced the road would end up co-opted for development to oppose the road itself.

    And they did – and the road was stopped.

    And anytime that road or ones like it are proposed – those who propose it say that the exits will be "minimal" but the skeptics know better by now – that this is the camel nose under the tent and won't believe anyone who says they will "limit" the exits.

    The basic utility of toll roads like the garden state parkway are …. maintained …by NOT putting exits everywhere…

    so you really cannot have it both ways.

    If the interstate goes 'close' to the urban area but they do't control the number of exits, that road is as good as gone for a road useful for travelling "around" the urban area.

    That's exactly what has happened to I-95 and the beltway.

    The whole complex is no longer fit or useful for people who seek to "bypass" Washington and NoVa.

    Instead – they head for I-81 or even Route 301 – especially at rush hour.

    I-95 has essentially been destroyed as a reliable north-south east coast corridor – in areas like Washington.

  44. Anonymous Avatar

    Transportation in Virginia is not about moving people and goods in a safe and efficient manner. It's about lobbying the CTB and other entities successfully to put some transportation resources near a well-connected landowner's property.

    We need HB 779 to pass for NoVA and then to be taken statewide. An improvement at the margins. The bill is sponsored by Del. Jim LeMunyon. Following are his remarks on July 8, 2910. (Part I)

    "Mr. Chairman and Commission members, thank you for the opportunity to appear this afternoon. The work of the Commission encompasses a wide range of issues. I have already engaged several members on particular topics and I look forward to continuing to do so. I appreciate the willingness of the Commission to listen to ideas from private citizens and elected officials of the Commonwealth.

    "Today, I want to briefly discuss only one issue: House Bill 779, a bill I introduced during the 2010 session to address the urgent issue of reducing transportation congestion in Northern Virginia. For reasons I will explain, H.B. 779 is not only a transportation bill, but is also a government transparency bill, because it will increase the transparency of the decision making processes in selecting transportation projects for funding.

    "I call this bill to the Commission’s attention because it was formally referred to the Commission for consideration, by a vote of the House Transportation Committee, in February 2010. This occurred before the Commission was formally established and thus, I feel it is appropriate to testify to the bill with the hope that the Commission might favorably refer the bill back to the Committee for the 2011 General Assembly session.

    TMT

  45. Virginia (not the only state) has a long tradition of developers getting involved in transportation decisions and I believe are at least partly responsible for the current condition of VDOT because most folks simply don't want to pay higher taxes so the developers can get their hands on it and it won't be used for congestion relief but rather for "economic development".

    This is why – even though people don't like tolls – they still prefer them 2-1 over taxes.

    But the beltway and the major interstates in this region are a lost cause.

    and I'm not convinced that higher densities would have done much other than drive even more folks to the exurbs for the standard home in a subdivision – which is the defacto standard for families.

    Single people or even couples without kids can live in more dense communities – and like it but when the kids come they start looking for the single family detached in a "nice" "affordable" subdivision and that kind of home is no longer available in NoVa.

    Making NoVa more dense won't attract commuters with families unless the single family detached house is somewhat comparable in price to what they can find in the exurbs – and they're not.. they're often about twice as much and that simply drives them to a commute – to "drive until they qualify".

    I do think the housing meltdown combined with HOT tolls is going to fundamentally alter this practice but probably not get rid of it.

    It's going to be harder to change jobs and be able to sell your house quickly and still get equity out of it.

Leave a Reply