The ‘Sketch’ posted 15 March 2010 generated over 40 comments to date. As a former student Emailed: “I hope they are having fun because they have not added much to the prospect of evolving sustainable human settlement patterns.”
At the urging of several who responded directly, EMR provides these additional observations on the topic:
The comments on “A Sustainable Future Sketch Process” were frightening and at the same time reassuring.
They were frightening because they demonstrate the how far some citizens are from understanding the parameters of functional settlement patterns. Geographic Illiteracy, Spacial Obliviousness, Developmental Topographic Disorientation – what ever one calls it – has a terrible collective impact on the future of civilization.
They are reassuring because they demonstrate that the organization and content of TRILO-G focuses on the right issues.
Volume I of TRILO-G (the first five PARTs) addresses the reasons why citizens do not yet understand the importance of human settlement patterns. The comments on the Sketch highlight the need for a new Conceptual Framework to guide the use and management of land. (THE USE AND MANAGEMENT OF LAND – PART FOUR of TRILO-G)
Three realities spelled out in PART FOUR are not yet well recognized:
1. There is a profound difference between land and land use patterns suitable for Urban use (serving the daily needs of 95 percent of the population and covering a maximum of 5 percent of the land area) and land and land use patterns suitable for NonUrban use (serving the needs of 100 percent of the population but directly involving the daily activities of 5 percent of the population and occupying 95 percent of the land area).
2. The Use and Management of land is different from the ownership of land for both Urban and NonUrban activities.
3. There are many rational choices for land ownership beyond ‘private’ and ‘public.’
EMR will not try to address all the misunderstandings illustrated by the comments but will focus on four topics:
Detroit, Land Speculation, Growth Projections, Settlement Pattern Choices and Commuting.
DETROIT
Had commentors bothered to read what Dave Bing and others are actually doing in Detroit – including support for Urban Agriculture – they would know that what is being proposed and attempted in Detroit is similar to what EMR has advocated for over two decades. Note that in the original Sketch post there is reference to ‘Subdivision Recycling’ and to ‘Parcel Consolidation’ (which includes Parcel Reconsolidation). In the mid 80’s SYNERGY clients were implementing these tactics to increase the flux of Urban activity where that was logical and remove Urban land uses where that made sense.
Beyond the MainStream Media babble concerning Detroit, there is an important issue that may or may not be adequately addressed in the strategies for a new Greater Detroit Core for the Detroit / Windsor NUR:
Are the changes in human settlement pattern resulting in Balance and Critical Mass necessary to support both Urban and NonUrban economic, social and physical interrelationship upon which a sustainable society must be based?
Is Balance and Critical Mass being addressed for each of the organic components of human settlement pattern?
In other words, will the result of Subdivision Recycling and Parcel Reconsolidation be functional human settlement patterns or just a hodgepodge checkerboard of land uses created by removal of derelict buildings? The 50,000 foot perspective noted in THE USE AND MANAGEMENT OF LAND is a place to start to get an answer to this question.
By the way, ‘farmland lost’ is NOT farmland lost FOREVER. Some of the best land for agriculture has been covered with dysfunctionally low density Urban land uses and can and should be recycled. Urban agriculture programs are demonstrating this in North America, the Carribean, Europe and Asia.
LAND SPECULATION
AZA who commented on the WSH, WL post was taking good notes at one of EMR’s lectures:
If a speculator pays market value for vacant and or underutilized land and pays the carrying costs (e.g. receives no cash flow from the land) for 17 years in the average case the Net Present Value (NVP) of the investment is ZERO when inflation is factored in. That is ZERO $. LAND SPECULATION DOES NOT PAY.
The 17 year parameter is based on actual experience in the Northern Part of Virginia over the period 1960 to 2000. The result is the same if one buys the land with borrowed funds and pays interest or if they buy the land for cash and Alternative Investment Opportunity is applied to determine NPV. If the land generates income during the holding period, that cash flow extends the time until NPV goes to Zero. A good rule of thumb is when buying vacant land to have a three year backdoor al all times.
Over time, interest eats speculators lunch. Amateurs do not know this and agents who profit from real estate churn will never disclose it.
If all speculatively held vacant and underutilized land (for which there will NEVER be a market due to the vast overbuild for Urban uses at functional patterns and densities) was put on the market at the same time, the price of vacant and underutilized land would fall.
It would likely fall to the point that it would be feasible to but it for extensive (aka, NonUrban) land uses. That is essentially what is happening in Detroit for high value crops and, as EMR noted four years ago, in selected areas in the Heartland.
The fact that paying the full cost of Urban services would help end land speculation is reason why speculators attacked Henry George with such vehemence and still do to this day.
A major housing downturn (See WSH, WL) is just what is needed to bring land speculation into perspective. The problem is that loss of dwelling values is now on course to Collapse the economy and destroy the economic foundations for millions of Households who had no idea they were contributing to Collapse.
GROWTH (DECLINE) PROJECTIONS
In the comments following the Sketch post, Larry G said:
“There are two big issues with growth.
“1. – The first is how do you predict growth?
“about the only thing I have seen is you look at the past 10 years and then assume the next 10 will be similar. That seems pretty dumb to me …”
There are a number of BIG potential errors generated by ten year projections keyed to the census. For example.
In the early 70s EMR managed a study of the Balto / Wash Corridor as a consultant to Wash COG and Balto COG (a joint Agency study). (Each COG represented two of the 4 key municipal jurisdictions in the Corridor.) The team was amazed to fine that based on the 1950 to 1960 growth rate, the 1960 to 1970 growth projection had been pegged by the two Agencies at ‘X.’ However, the actual growth from 1960 t0 1970 was 1 / 7th of X. Being off by a factor of 7 can have BIG consequences.
An interesting footnote: The Planned New Community of Columbia, MD is in the Balto – Wash Corridor and the economic model was based on the Balto COG projection. Instead of getting ‘Y’ percent of the ‘X’ growth, it got 8 Y percent of 1 / 7 X and came out ahead of projection. Most of the Corridor growth happened in Columbia – a 13,000 acre patch of the 200,000 + / – acre Corridor. This was an early illustration for EMR of the vast amount of the vacant and underutilized land within 25 miles of the Centroid of major Urban agglomerations.
To avoid going off track, the Sketch EMR posted suggests an ANNUAL review of the MegaRegional numbers based on what is actually happening. There are a number of indicators that can be monitored to be sure Agencies are preparing for the right parameters.
“2. – the second is even harder. Let’s assume that you correctly predict a certain amount of growth.
“Now tell me where that growth will allocate itself geographically – honest injun – no handwaving or rope-a-dope theories.. just lay it out in plain English.”
If the projection is made by professionals who know the entire Region and have no bias (such as having consulting contracts with jurisdictions that are governed by ‘pro-growth’ Agencies), past experience and alternative scenarios – for example in the above example, Jim Rouse was offering a far better product that any other developer in the Balto – Wash Corridor – plus annual monitoring, the projections as to location can be very close to what actually happens.
In the years ahead there is the probability of loss of population and Jobs for those Communities that do not take actions to evolve Balance and Critical Mass – as in Detroit and many other places that get less publicity.
“The Fredericksburg area is project to DOUBLE in population in the next 30 years. Where will it allocate itself geographically?”
First the big picture:
If one adds up all the municipal / SubRegion projections (in the case of VA, the PDC numbers) across the MegaRegion they will find FAR more growth projected than is projected at the Regional scale. If Greater Fredericksburg doubles, other SubRegions will grow less than projected and / or others will shrink.
The Wash COG SubRegional projections have been quite accurate over the past three decades. The staff has wisely expanded the analysis area beyond the COG jurisdictions borders. If they had included the entire National Capital SubRegion of the Washington-Baltimore NUR in each analysis, the projections would have been right on. The distribution of jobs and households by municipal jurisdiction, however, has varied widely.
On the SubRegional scale:
If Greater Fredericksburg grows by 50%, 100% or 200% over the next 30 years there is plenty vacant and underutilized land to accommodate that growth ON LESS LAND THAN IS NOW URBANIZED. The bigger issue is to maintain Balance and Critical Mass.
SETTLEMENT PATTERN CHOICES AND COMMUTING
As EMR noted In the WSH, WL comments, EMR will not add additional comments on the WSH, WL string. Larry posted the following to which EMR will respond here:
“I think part of the job here is to understand why 300,000 people live in the Fredericksburg Area and at least 50% of those who work – commute 100 miles a day round trip if [because] the option of having a nice place to live for the same amount of money existed [does not exist] in NoVa.”
The first ‘job’ is for Larry to understand that these ‘100 mile commuters’ work AND LIVE in the Northern Part of Virginia, not somewhere else. SubRegions and Regions are determined by the pattern of economic, social and physical activity.
“Folks do not commute 100 miles a day – every day because they misunderstand their options – right?”
In fact they do. They do that because they misunderstand their options and because of what they believe to be the facts are in reality Myths that are spelled out in The Shape of the Future (SotF). The HANDBOOK process has an exercise on over coming Myths.
Why they are wrong is a complex issue and one of the reasons SotF was written. As noted below, there is an entire industry that profits from perpetuating Myths so they can avoid paying (or passing) on the total cost of their actions – they are called ‘externalities.’ These externalities turn up miles away – in the Chesapeake Bay and in the federal budget for “commuter assistance.”
“One must assume that most of them have made the tradeoff calculations correctly.”
Sorry, they do not. And the problem did not start in 1980 or in 2003. For 90 years land owners, developers and builders have relied on subsidies and not having to pay the full cost of their actions. These Enterprises make more money in the short term if they perpetuate the Myths. AND after they move in, the homeowners EVERY DAY THEY LIVE IN A WSH, WL also enjoy subsides paid for by those who have chosen more sustainable settlement patterns.
“Thousands of them drive 5 miles or less to a bus or van – and they do this every day 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year – for something they want and consider worth the sacrifice.”
Well that “sacrifice” by a small minority of the workers in the NUR is costing the majority in the NUR (8 plus million of them) AND all tax payers in the US of A a lot of money. If the minority had to pay the full cost of the services they would make different choices.
“If the only answer to this is to make this option more expensive…”
As in ‘pay the full cost’…
“… it still won’t change how people feel about the appeal of living 50 miles from where they work.”
That is doubtful. EMR’s position is that on a level playing field a well informed buyer will question and abandon the Myths that drive dysfunctional human settlement patterns.
Recall that the only way one can help commuters is to help them become non-commuters. See BRZ Column # 92 “Solving the Commuter Problem” 5 Feb 2007 concerning the expansion of VRE.
Recall also that in any Alpha Community (inside the Clear Edge around the Core of the Region or outside the Clear Edge there will always be SOME who ‘commute.’ Commuting, however is not a sustainable home – work relationship for a significant percentage of the population in any Alpha Community.
“I think you have to come at this problem accepting that reality.”
NOW YOU ARE TALKING!
“Here’s an essential truth – People can live like Groveton lives – on a large lot with well/septic without traffic noise or sketchy characters in the neighborhood and schools that give their kids a genuine opportunity to grow up with a good education for 2/3 to 3/4 less than it costs Groveton if they are willing to commute 8 times further a day than Groveton.”
Let us leave Groveton out of this. Both Jim Bacon and EMR agree that Groveton and others who have worked hard and done well should be able to live where and how they choose, as long as they pay the full cost of their decisions – including ALL externalities.
As EMR has noted repeatedly, most of those who live in Groveton’s zip code could not (or would not choose to live there) if they had to pay the full cost of their location choice. See The 10X Rule.
“Why would folks do that?
Because of Geographic Illiteracy? Because of Spacial Obliviousness engendered by Autonomobile Myths? Because of Developmental Topographic Disorientation?
“until we understand why and deal with it on some level other than financial punishment …”
Not ‘punishment’, just paying their fair share.
“… of those who engage in it.. I don’t think we are anywhere close to [support for F] fundamental [T] transformation because people – have to want the solution rather than have it imposed on them.”
And the longer pandering politicians and Business-As-Usual advocates can keep citizens from understanding reality, the longer they will think something is being ‘imposed.’
“Either you think most of these folks are just plain stupid and don’t realize how dumb they are in choosing their commute – or… they do know and there are no better options for them (in their minds).”
Ah “BETTER OPTIONS”!
THAT is a BIG part of the answer. Where folks do have BETTER OPTIONS they take them. That is way those better located Units sell for so much more.
But again, there is a whole industry that makes more profit in a shorter time by perpetuating Myths and dysfunctional human settlement patterns that consume vastly more land than is necessary for quality human habitations because the Enterprises do not pay full cost of their actions. These Enterprises, of course, share the profits with governance practitioners through political contributions and support Institutions to perpetuate the dysfunctional processes. What Prof. Lucy call the Tyranny of Easy Development Decisions.
That is why the creative use of Private Transfer Fees might be a good idea to encourage more functional settlement patterns and reward developers and builders for making the right decision without having to resort to bribes and subsides.
EMR
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.