Killing communities with urban planning
I've been criticizing the grand development schemes of Minneapolis Mayor Rybak and all those other planners who continue to try to forcibly rebuild our cities to match their vision of what a city should be. City planning on a grand scale is a virus that has spread widely.
Richfield, my own city, is planning changes in the last remaining commercial area in that city to "establish a future vision". Quoting from the city's plan, already set in motion: "The City wants to create a vision that will set the tone for a master plan for the future of the area to ensure its continued vitality."
Notice the contradiction in that statement? In order to ensure "continued vitality", it must be true that the area is ALREADY vital. Well... it is, and it got that way WITHOUT a "vision" and being part of the city's plan. That neighborhood has changed continually during the 35 years I've lived in the area. It's a strip of businesses along Penn and along 66th, surrounded on all sides by residential areas. For those who live nearby, it's a convenient shopping area, yet it has some stores that people from further away travel to visit. No, it doesn't represent someone's grand vision... it's a real mixture of separate, unconnected businesses... supermarkets, bowling alley, hobby store, a couple of secondhand stores, paint store, auto parts, restaurants, rental store, used cars, and a real variety of small specialty stores... even a podiatrist where a Sambo's restaurant once was, before Sambo's became too politically incorrect. Oh, yes... there's one of the four Richfield city-owned liquor stores there too.
Part of the problem the city sees is a typical governmental problem. There is a lot of traffic on both Penn and 66th. Odd thing is, businesses like traffic, but one might ask why it's a busy intersection. The reason is simple: both streets are heavily used to avoid the jammed-up, Crosstown freeway a few blocks away. Much of the traffic isn't local at all, but people just flowing through to somewhere else. The city claims traffic congestion and a lack of parking. Those are both just false claims... the heavy traffic flows easily, does not interfere with getting to the businesses, and that commercial area has more off-street parking than any similar area I'm aware of.
The city also claims, as justification for interference, an unfriendly pedestrian environment and aging buildings. Hogwash. I've walked the area many times, and I don't know what "unfriendly" means, but the truth is, very few people walk to shop any longer anyway. When I read that, I thought of the areas Richfield has already "redeveloped", and realized that they DEFINE "unfriendly" to pedestrians. They look nice when you drive by, precisely because there is nothing there of any importance to you... nothing to distract you. There is nothing to look at, and no interesting stores to wander into. That's NOT true of the 66th and Penn shopping area.
The truth is, judging from new developments, the people involved in city planning obviously don't know anything at all about being a pedestrian. If I walk the mile or so to the 66th and Penn area, I go under the grand new 35W overpass, that was built with wide, lighted walkways set back from the street (making the span longer). Problem is, almost nobody walks that route... it was a total waste of money that sounded good to some architectural planner. I could show you a lot of other planned walking areas that don't have any walkers.
As for "aging buildings"... what building isn't aging... and what's wrong with old buildings? Fact is, the mayor lives in an "aging" apartment building at the south end of that area. I'll wager that building won't be considered for "redevelopment". I know the "aging buildings" that are driving the planners nuts... a strip of very small, inexpensive shops along the east side of Penn, just south of 66th. Each shop is independent... no coordinated signage, so they, as a group, look haphazard, and a little messy. Personally, I call that charming. Each store has an individual identity, and its own unique clientele. If the cost of having a business in that little strip mall were to increase by 20%, I suspect all of those businesses would close or move. Those small businesses are precisely the kind planners have no appreciation for, and they're the ones most vulnerable to any interference from government. Richfield obliterated a similar strip mall at 75th and Lyndale, replaced by a big, slab-faced retirement home with a few mostly-vacant store spaces along the sidewalk, and who knows what else.
Why are those small businesses of any importance? Wouldn't we all be better off with several stronger stores there instead? Hell... I could pick several businesses I'd like to see there instead of what is there now, but should anyone have the right to do that? Come to think of it, I can think of many stores I would love to see where the Richfield City Hall sits now, and making those changes would certainly increase the city's tax base.
Small independent stores and businesses are the HEART of this nation. Some of them become successful and grow, others remain small, and many fail, but whatever they do, they do with their own money and effort... taking nothing from the rest of us. They are diversity personified... they are entrepreneurism in the best tradition, and, together, they offer the rest of us a rich shopping experience, and the ability to find almost anything we need at a price we can afford.
Our cities are rapidly driving out such small businesses. Urban planning and development inevitably raises the costs of operating within each development, destroying those individual businesses that used to be the American dream. Chain stores with better financing move in instead... often recruited by developers. If a chain store will help the image of a redevelopment, they may get special deals from the city... the exact opposite treatment the old stores received.
What do we as consumers end up with? Developed, planned shopping areas that are virtually identical to each other. Very little uniqueness in any of them. Boring... just plain boring, regardless of how pretty they may be.
Richfield has already initiated a "study" by a graduate student group from the U of Minnesota. One might ask what graduate students know about the 66th and Penn area, or about shopping, walking, business, or life in general. There is no doubt about who they will be trying to please with their study; their professor, who is undoubtedly part of the urban planning movement, determined to beautify the world at the expense of the people who built it and live in it.
If urban planning is not appropriate in our communities, what would I suggest instead?
C'mon back here, and I'll present a libertarian viewpoint of urban non-planning and try to paint a picture of what the result would be.
Richfield, my own city, is planning changes in the last remaining commercial area in that city to "establish a future vision". Quoting from the city's plan, already set in motion: "The City wants to create a vision that will set the tone for a master plan for the future of the area to ensure its continued vitality."
Notice the contradiction in that statement? In order to ensure "continued vitality", it must be true that the area is ALREADY vital. Well... it is, and it got that way WITHOUT a "vision" and being part of the city's plan. That neighborhood has changed continually during the 35 years I've lived in the area. It's a strip of businesses along Penn and along 66th, surrounded on all sides by residential areas. For those who live nearby, it's a convenient shopping area, yet it has some stores that people from further away travel to visit. No, it doesn't represent someone's grand vision... it's a real mixture of separate, unconnected businesses... supermarkets, bowling alley, hobby store, a couple of secondhand stores, paint store, auto parts, restaurants, rental store, used cars, and a real variety of small specialty stores... even a podiatrist where a Sambo's restaurant once was, before Sambo's became too politically incorrect. Oh, yes... there's one of the four Richfield city-owned liquor stores there too.
Part of the problem the city sees is a typical governmental problem. There is a lot of traffic on both Penn and 66th. Odd thing is, businesses like traffic, but one might ask why it's a busy intersection. The reason is simple: both streets are heavily used to avoid the jammed-up, Crosstown freeway a few blocks away. Much of the traffic isn't local at all, but people just flowing through to somewhere else. The city claims traffic congestion and a lack of parking. Those are both just false claims... the heavy traffic flows easily, does not interfere with getting to the businesses, and that commercial area has more off-street parking than any similar area I'm aware of.
The city also claims, as justification for interference, an unfriendly pedestrian environment and aging buildings. Hogwash. I've walked the area many times, and I don't know what "unfriendly" means, but the truth is, very few people walk to shop any longer anyway. When I read that, I thought of the areas Richfield has already "redeveloped", and realized that they DEFINE "unfriendly" to pedestrians. They look nice when you drive by, precisely because there is nothing there of any importance to you... nothing to distract you. There is nothing to look at, and no interesting stores to wander into. That's NOT true of the 66th and Penn shopping area.
The truth is, judging from new developments, the people involved in city planning obviously don't know anything at all about being a pedestrian. If I walk the mile or so to the 66th and Penn area, I go under the grand new 35W overpass, that was built with wide, lighted walkways set back from the street (making the span longer). Problem is, almost nobody walks that route... it was a total waste of money that sounded good to some architectural planner. I could show you a lot of other planned walking areas that don't have any walkers.
As for "aging buildings"... what building isn't aging... and what's wrong with old buildings? Fact is, the mayor lives in an "aging" apartment building at the south end of that area. I'll wager that building won't be considered for "redevelopment". I know the "aging buildings" that are driving the planners nuts... a strip of very small, inexpensive shops along the east side of Penn, just south of 66th. Each shop is independent... no coordinated signage, so they, as a group, look haphazard, and a little messy. Personally, I call that charming. Each store has an individual identity, and its own unique clientele. If the cost of having a business in that little strip mall were to increase by 20%, I suspect all of those businesses would close or move. Those small businesses are precisely the kind planners have no appreciation for, and they're the ones most vulnerable to any interference from government. Richfield obliterated a similar strip mall at 75th and Lyndale, replaced by a big, slab-faced retirement home with a few mostly-vacant store spaces along the sidewalk, and who knows what else.
Why are those small businesses of any importance? Wouldn't we all be better off with several stronger stores there instead? Hell... I could pick several businesses I'd like to see there instead of what is there now, but should anyone have the right to do that? Come to think of it, I can think of many stores I would love to see where the Richfield City Hall sits now, and making those changes would certainly increase the city's tax base.
Small independent stores and businesses are the HEART of this nation. Some of them become successful and grow, others remain small, and many fail, but whatever they do, they do with their own money and effort... taking nothing from the rest of us. They are diversity personified... they are entrepreneurism in the best tradition, and, together, they offer the rest of us a rich shopping experience, and the ability to find almost anything we need at a price we can afford.
Our cities are rapidly driving out such small businesses. Urban planning and development inevitably raises the costs of operating within each development, destroying those individual businesses that used to be the American dream. Chain stores with better financing move in instead... often recruited by developers. If a chain store will help the image of a redevelopment, they may get special deals from the city... the exact opposite treatment the old stores received.
What do we as consumers end up with? Developed, planned shopping areas that are virtually identical to each other. Very little uniqueness in any of them. Boring... just plain boring, regardless of how pretty they may be.
Richfield has already initiated a "study" by a graduate student group from the U of Minnesota. One might ask what graduate students know about the 66th and Penn area, or about shopping, walking, business, or life in general. There is no doubt about who they will be trying to please with their study; their professor, who is undoubtedly part of the urban planning movement, determined to beautify the world at the expense of the people who built it and live in it.
If urban planning is not appropriate in our communities, what would I suggest instead?
C'mon back here, and I'll present a libertarian viewpoint of urban non-planning and try to paint a picture of what the result would be.
posted by Robert Ronald Smith at 12:02 AM
Permalink
Post
to freedomSLUT
<< Home