When I was at the New Partners for Smart Growth conference in Kansas City, I saw a speaker argue that walkability increases property values (a proposition I'm not taking a position on, at least not in this blog post). When someone asked about affordability, he suggested inclusionary zoning as a solution.
In some places (e.g. Midtown Manhattan) one-way streets are relatively harmless. In others, one-ways turn streets into speedways, threatening pedestrian safety and gutting neighborhood businesses (since someone going 50 mph is going to be less likely to stop for any reason). How do you tell the difference?
I had always thought that traffic lights calmed traffic. But last week at the Partners for Smart Growth conference in Kansas City, I learned that at least sometimes, there was a better alternative. Some of us went on a tour of the city's Westside neighborhood. The neighborhood's major intersection once had traditional red, yellow and green lights, and now has a blinking red light telling drivers to slow down (essentially a kind of electronic stop sign).
After last week's snowstorm, New York City rebounded smartly: the streets are plowed, the subways are running. By contrast, the school where I teach (40 miles out in Suffollk County) is closed. Why? Because the students mostly live in suburbs near the school, and many of them are snowed in because the county can't plow the roads fast enough. Cars and blizzards simply do not mix, and evidently it is easier to repair a few train lines than it is to plow thousands of miles of roadways.
Last Friday, I gave a speech on conservatives and smart growth at the New Partners for Smart Growth conference. At the panel discussion after the speech I was asked "what if you want to build something nice and your neighbor wants to build a car wash?" I gave an honest but nuanced answer about how zoning is fine in the right hands, but that it is so often abused that I wonder about whether the benefits are worth the costs, etc.
Feeling like you could use a good boost of pro-transit, pro-urban romance to brighten up your day? Go online and see Paperman (link here), an Oscar-nominated short in which a romance arises on a downtown train that looks an awful lot like Chicago's El.
In Walkable City, Jeff Speck points out that 1990s sitcoms tend to be more urban and more pro-urban than those of the 1950s and 1960s (which tended to be set in small towns or rural areas) or even the 1970s (often set in depressing or depressed urban locations, with the exception of "Mary Tyler Moore.")
Pundit Matt Yglesias has dug up some interesting Federal Reserve-compiled data on regional housing prices. He compares today's housing prices not to those of the mid-2000s real estate boom, but to 1998 pre-boom housing prices. The Fed's data shows that some regions have experienced long-term price increases despite the recession, while in others housing prices have not recovered to pre-boom levels.
I am in the middle of Jeff Speck's Walkable City, and noticed his statement that walkable cities "provide a better quality of life." (p. 70). But when I lived in car-oriented cities like Jacksonville and Atlanta, I talked to more than one ex-northerner who said they preferred the "quality of life" of the suburbs where they lived. Clearly, not everyone understands this term the same way.
Nicole Garnett of Notre Dame Law School is publishing a sympathetic critique of form-based codes (available here, soon to be published in Brooklyn Law Review). She supports the aims of form-based codes, but wonders whether they would be more appropriate as voluntary codes than as citywide zoning overlays. She has three concerns.