| 
							
							
								NewGeography.com blogs 
							
															   
        	
    
        
    California Superior Court Judge Michael Kenny ruled against  the California High Speed Rail Authority in two decisions announced on November  25. In the first, Judge Kenny ruled that the Business Plan failed to meet the  requirements of the voter approved referendum under California Assembly Bill  3034 (2008), in not identifying sufficient capital funding for the first  segment. As a result, the Business Plan needs to be redrafted. In the second  decision, Judge Kenny declined to issue a conformity ruling that would have  paved the way for $8 billion in bonds that had been approved by voters, which  were also subject to same Assembly Bill 3034. Judge Kenny declined to stop construction of the project,  which is scheduled to start in the Spring. However, the Authority only has  federal funds for that segment, and which would require, in the longer run,  matching state funds (which were to have been from the bonds). According to the San  Francisco Chronicle , Kenny's  found that the California High Speed Rail Authority "abused its discretion  by approving a funding plan that did not comply with the requirements  of law." 
        	
    
        
    The restoration of central city living and working  environments has been one of the more important developments in the nation’s  metropolitan areas over the past two decades. Regrettably, a good story has  been exaggerated out of all proportion in the print,  electronic and online media.   Exaggerating Core Population Increases: The rise of population  in urban cores has been important, but it has too often been used to suggest  the apparent, but fallacious opposite, suburban decline. In fact, the suburbs  are hardly in decline, with 93.5 percent of major metropolitan area growth  outside a 10 mile radius from city hall between the 2000 and 2010 censuses  (See: Flocking  Elsewhere: The Downtown Growth Story). Exaggerating CBD Office Space Gains: Similar misinformation had  been circulating about office space outside the nation’s CBDs (central business  districts, or “downtowns”). Commercial real estate information company Costar’s Randyl Drummer recently described suburbia’s improving fortunes (See: Once  Left for Dead, Suburban Office Making a Comeback). 
“Some analysts wrote the obituary  of the suburban office campus as downsizing companies shed millions of square  feet, in many cases consolidating into buildings closer to public transit in  urban centers.”  It’s just not happening, according to Costar research: 
“Overall, the suburbs have garnered  more than their usual share of leasing demand over the past two years,  according to an analysis by CoStar real estate economists. Since the beginning  of 2012, suburban markets have accounted for a whopping 87% of office demand --  which is 13% more than their 'fair share' based on the total market size  compared with CBD office markets, according to data presented at CoStar’s  recent third-quarter office review and forecast.”  Indeed, CBD leasing, at 13 percent of the total, is a full  50 percent below their current share of inventory (Figure 1). As of mid-2013,  the suburbs accounted for nearly three quarters of the nation’s office  inventory (Figure 2).  
 
 Costar cites strong suburban development in Raleigh’s  Research Triangle, and further notes that: 
A diverse set of markets that  include Sacramento, San Jose, Austin, Kansas City and Charlotte have posted  some of the strongest net office absorption among suburban markets. This is despite the glowing publicity being given to core  area development, especially in places like Charlotte and Austin.  The reality is that the monumental CBD towers dominating  metropolitan skylines do not indicate downtown dominance. In fact, throughout  the high income world, most metropolitan employment is outside CBDs. In the  United States, typically 90 percent of employment is outside the CBDs. The  suburban employment (outside the CBD) share is a bit smaller in Western Europe, Canada and Australia, but  still averages approximately 80 percent or more. The good news is that neither suburbia nor downtown is dead.  
        	
    
        
    Aaron Renn's recent piece on the Rust Belt has some formidable strengths that can be the foundation of its revitalization, but it has a set of structural problems that must be confronted to achieve true revitalization.  Current revitalization strategies, he suggests, are outside of each city's system or fail to bring the appropriate heft to lift all those who need lifting -- largely because they only obliquely address the structural challenges.  The challenges:
 
RacismCorruptionClosed societiesTwo-tiered environment and resulting paralysis I won't rehash Aaron's assessment, but I do agree with it.
   What occurred to me is that, if you think about it, the South's cities were in the same position following the Civil War -- and faced the same obstacles -- until after World War II.  Racism clearly plagued Southern metros and hindered growth during that era; many places were well known for their corruption.  The South certainly had a reputation for being a closed society, unwelcome to outsiders, and its history of reliance on low- and moderately-skilled labor made the South perhaps more skeptical of highly educated labor, just like in the Midwest.
   Following World War II, however, Southern metros began to make great strides to catch up with and even surpass Northeastern and Midwestern cities.  I'm no scholar on post-war Southern growth, but it appears Southern metros took on these strategies to move upward and onward:
 Tolerate Newcomers.  After World War II Southern cities realized that they could no longer rely on intra-region growth if they were going to prosper, particularly during a period with widespread migration of blacks to Northern cities at the time.  Southern business leaders rightfully recognized opportunities to bring businesses and residents to the South from other parts of the country.
 Seeing education as an asset.  It's no coincidence that the Southern metros that have developed the strongest post-war economies -- Atlanta, Charlotte, Dallas, Houston, Austin, Raleigh, Nashville -- are home to significant educational institutions.  After the war the colleges and universities of large Southern metros became integral to their growth.
 Becoming a low-cost alternative to the rest of the country.  Prior to their turnaround Southern cities probably described themselves in terms of what they lacked in comparison to Northern cities.  They did not have the impressive skylines, the classic neighborhoods, the exceptional park systems or the infrastructure that were the legacy of Northern cities.  However they did have cheap land and cheap labor, and those factors became the driver that facilitated the development of what they lacked.
 The above strategies, combined with the widespread use of air conditioning that made the Southern climate more tolerable, allowed for the growth of Southern metros. 
 The Rust Belt should take note.  While the South only address race as the federal government made them, perhaps the Rust Belt can become a leader in addressing race matters.  If the South can learn to become more tolerant of outsiders, the Midwest can as well; it does have a legacy of immigration that can serve as a foundation.  Advocates of the Rust Belt Chic movement may turn the low-cost strategy on its head -- the Rust Belt has a unique physical and social legacy that those who've grown up in places with less would welcome.  And the Rust Belt has perhaps the greatest collection of public research universities in the nation (even if most are located in smaller metros and not the big cities), and they could be a huge driver of revitalization.
 Clearly, the South did not get everything right.  But when faced with an existential crisis not unlike what the Rust Belt faces today, they adapted.  The Rust Belt must find its strengths and play to them. 
        	
    
        
    A couple weeks ago, noting the apparently immunity of global city Chicago to problems elsewhere in the city, I asked the question:   What happens when global city Chicago realizes there’s a good chance it   can simply let the rest of the city fail and get on with its business? I’d argue we’re seeing the results right before our eyes. At the same time murders in significant parts of the city are even   higher than during the peak of the crack epidemic, when the city says   its too poor to hire more cops, when 54 schools are closed and a 1000   teachers laid off, half the mental health clinics closed, libraries cut   back, etc., Chicago has found a nearly limitless stream of money for   elite amenities, most recently – and appallingly – $50+ million in TIF   subsidies for a new DePaul arena. There’s also been hundreds of millions   of dollars more in corporate welfare under Daley and Rahm. Investing in success is a great idea – if you plan to harvest a   return on that investment to fund city services and your safety net.   It’s clear there’s no intention of doing this in Chicago. I discuss this   in my most recent City Journal piece, “Well-Heeled in the Windy City.” Here’s an excerpt: 
 Clearly, cities like Chicago must retain a substantial portion of   upscale residents and businesses. Detroit and other cities show the   results of failure on this front. Yet the moral case for elite amenities   has always rested on the assumption of a broader public good: what   benefited the wealthy would also make life better for the rest of the   city….Under Emanuel’s leadership, though, Chicago has made peace with a   two-tier society and broken the social contract. Rather than trying to   expand opportunity, Chicago has bet its future on its already successful   residents—leading some on the left to call Emanuel Mayor 1 Percent. The   Windy City isn’t alone in following this strategy. Detroit has gone   bankrupt, but that hasn’t stopped city government from lavishing $450   million in subsidies on a new Red Wings arena.  Since I critique bike infrastructure as part of Chicago’s splurge for   the elite, I want to clarify that point here where there are lots of   bike advocates. I strongly support bike infrastructure. In fact, I once   gave a presentation where I said protected bike lanes and bike share   should be Rahm’s top two transport priorities on taking office because   they are cost-effective and can leverage outside funds. However, even   the most passionate advocates must admit that the optics are bad on   making a full court press on bike lanes when cutting core services   elsewhere. More importantly, Rahm’s explicit rationale on bike   infrastructure has been luring talent for the tech economy, thus it is   an elite focused venture. For example, the Sun-Times reported: 
 Emanuel called protected bike lanes central to the city’s sustainability   plan and his efforts to make Chicago the high-tech hub of the Midwest.   Chicago “moved up dramatically” in the list of major cities whose   employees bike to work, he said. “It’s part of my effort to recruit entrepreneurs and start-up   businesses because a lot of those employees like to bike to work,” he   said. “It is not an accident that, where we put our first protected bike   lane is also where we have the most concentration of digital companies   and digital employees. Every time you speak to entrepreneurs and people   in the start-up economy and high-tech industry, one of the key things   they talk about in recruiting workers is, can they have more bike   lanes.”  I’m simply taking the mayor at his word. (See also here and here). This piece originally appeared at The Urbanophile. 
        	
    
        by Anonymous 10/09/2013
     Since Rahm Emanuel entered the political scene years ago, he’s  been a master at manipulating the press to his benefit. A pliant media has  largely gone along with whatever talking point Emanuel desired. Lately, some of  the media has begun to put the spotlight on violent Chicago with its rather  high murder rate. Banning or restricting handguns has not been very successful  in combatting violence in Chicago.  The  website Big Government reports the bloody details:  
After Chicago recorded a terrible  homicide total of 53 in August, September wasn't much better for Rahm's  "world class" city. The city suffered 41 homicides, 30 of which resulted  from 184 total shootings. 
 September  brings more bad news for Chicago residents. While Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Police  Superintendent Garry McCarthy, and the Chicago media have continued to hammer  the point that the "crime rate is down," and "murder is  down," as of September 22, the homicide total for 2013 now exceeds the  rate up to the same date in 2011 by two percent at 350, according to the Chicago  Police Crime Data Portal. How does today’s Chicago hold up at the  violent memory of Al Capone’s Chicago of the 1920s? Not very well.  WLS-TV investigated the data and the evidence  is rather stunning report in February:
 
Let's compare two months: January 1929,  leading up to the St. Valentine's Day Massacre, and last month, January 2013.  Forty-two people were killed in Chicago last month, the most in January since  2002, and far worse than the city's most notorious crime era at the end of the  Roaring Twenties.  Even though the image of Chicago, perpetuated  by Hollywood over the years, was that mobsters routinely mowed down people on  the streets, the crime stats tell us that we were safer under Capone than  Emmanuel. In January 1929 there were 26 killings. Forty-two people were killed  in Chicago last month, the most in January since 2002.  Even though the image of Chicago, perpetuated  by Hollywood over the years, was that mobsters routinely mowed down people on  the streets, the crime stats tell a different story. The figures from January  2013 are significantly higher than the January of Al Capone's most famous year.
   It’s not just the Capone era violence that  doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. Constantly we hear from the media and advocates of  gun control that we don’t want things to become “the Wild West”. In the last  several years, historians have begun to look at this long time legend that was  promoted by Hollywood movies.  As Ryan  McMaken explains:
 
Historian Richard Shenkman largely attributes  this to the legacy of those reliably-violent Western films. "Many more  people have died in Hollywood Westerns than ever died on the real Frontier…[i]n  the real Dodge City, for example, there were just five killings in 1878, the  most homicidal year in the little town's Frontier history: scarcely enough to  sustain a typical two-hour movie."
   The old West with its minimal government and  armed populace has never been too popular with progressives. But, the reality  is it was never really violent according to Terry  Anderson and Peter Hill. So, the murder rate of the Capone era and Dodge city  of 1878 would be a major improvement for Mayor Rahm Emanuel. Note: This post was originally incorrectly attributed to Wendell Cox. |