Why America Destroyed its Cities

[BridgeTroll]

Just like it is incorrect to blame corporations and developers... It is pretty tough to lay it all on the planners.  The planners were planning in accordance to the peoples wants.  The people wanted suburbia... and rather than some haphazard and truly poor developments... they planned suburbia.  Planners may have been enablers... just like developers and corporations... but they were only reacting to what the consumer wanted.

I really understand what you are saying, Bridge Troll, and two years ago I would have even agreed with you.  But in all good faith I simply cannot agree any longer, as the facts did not bear out our common assumption.

In fact they were the opposite.

No one wanted suburbs.  They hadn't ever existed, so there wasn't a pre existing demand for them.

The 19th Century, especially in the Industrial Cities of the US, was simply obsessed with the evils of 'overcrowdigng'---what we would call today 'density'.  Taking for granted the observation of Pericles: 'All Good Things go to The City, Because of the City's Greatness", they misidentified population density as the problem instead of better industrial and building practices and began well, tinkering.

Starting with the fabulist notions of the City Beautiful Movement, and then gaining steam through the Progressive Era, every social ill and every Cause to improve humanity, from prostitution to lending practices, to racial mixing, to aesthetic design, to epidemiology was built into the construction of city planning.

The idea for 'suburbs' got federal, national and Planning green light following the National City Planning conference in 1909.  But the experimental trolley line suburbs had already been implemented in 'enlightened' cities (like Jacksonville) up to 15 years earlier.

In fact, I would posit that the reason Jacksonville's downtown failure is so extreme can be attributed to the fact that Jacksonville was such a beacon and guiding light of Progressive and liberal values at the turn of the Century.  We were the first Southern City to have a Progressive City Planning Board, we beat the rest of the cities here by a couple of decades.

I believe that what you are seeing in our downtown and urban areas is the predictable outcome of how we designed our policies and our codes.  All of the cities started deteriorating by mid century.  We are just 20 years further into the process than most.

Great video.  Anybody alive back then saw them all the time.  You know... the wonders of science... the world of tommorrow...etc.  Disney was a huge promoter of such things.  A fun experiment might be to keep score as the movie runs to see how many things never came to pass... have yet still to happen... and correct predictions.  My guess is correct predictions will lose.

That said... these were things people were told were possible... people wanted it... they believed it... they were told(as we are today) "technology will solve all our problems".  You notice there is no mention of where the power will come from.  Oil was cheap, atomic power was coming online and unlimited.  Why would I want to live in a dirty old building in the city when I can have a nice shiny new house.  Why take the bus when I can simply drive.

We killed the city... you, me, and ma and pa kettle...

The planners gave us what we wanted... we wanted what the futurists/scientists/sociologists told us was possible.

Imagine suburbia without the planners.  It still would have happened... it just would have been  a huge freeking mess.

[BridgeTroll]

Hmmmm... you mention "demassification".  This certainly makes sense in an era of MAD.  Couple that with the interstate system which we know was actually partly a military project.

Duck and cover baby...

[BridgeTroll]

They certainly believed in survivability... We are all fans of "Alas Babylon"

[BridgeTroll]

Back to the topic tho... We have brought out many different causes to suburbia... some more influential than others.  It is clear that the sum total of all these factors brought us what we have today.  I understand you think otherwise but I am not one to conclude there was some grand design... or diabolical conspiracy, or governmental policy that got us where we are today.  It is likely the result of all three... but most of all... it was done with the full and enthusiastic support of the American public.

[BridgeTroll]

They certainly believed in survivability... We are all fans of "Alas Babylon"

Thanks BT!  youve given me another direction for research!

Oh No!  I didnt mean too!   

[BridgeTroll]

Another angle that I do not believe we have touched on is WWII.  Many of the cities of Europe and Asia were essentially destroyed.  These countries had to rebuild their cities.  Transport needed to be public because that was the most cost effective for them.  These rebuilt cities are relatively modern in comparison the their "undestroyed and non rebuilt" American cities.  While they rebuilt their cities from the inside out... we simply expanded. 

Why?

Land was cheap and easy. New homes on that land were modern and affordable.  Transportation moved towards private auto rather than public conveyance because we didn't need to use it.

[A-Finnius]

This is one of the more interesting and better forum discussions I have ever read on MetroJax. 

For the longest time I thought the deterioration of the American downtown and urban structure was due to the separation of economic classes.

Do we have any examples of an American city that did not suffer this fate? 

[Ocklawaha]

Another angle that I do not believe we have touched on is WWII.  Many of the cities of Europe and Asia were essentially destroyed.  These countries had to rebuild their cities.  Transport needed to be public because that was the most cost effective for them.  These rebuilt cities are relatively modern in comparison the their "undestroyed and non rebuilt" American cities.  While they rebuilt their cities from the inside out... we simply expanded. 

Why?

Land was cheap and easy. New homes on that land were modern and affordable.  Transportation moved towards private auto rather than public conveyance because we didn't need to use it.

Interesting angle BT and I'd agree with the point that Europe and Asia both were able to pick up the pieces with the best available technology of the era. That however doesn't explain my sojourn in Colombia, Panama, Brasil ETC. where I found many cities, Medellin for example, to be FAR ahead of Jacksonville in almost every way. Transit, Water, Medical/EMS, Airport, Offices, Residential, Parks... and on and on. Nobody has ever bombed them back to the stone age as we did with Japan and Germany and over all they are poorer then either of them, yet they excel. What are we missing here?

OCKLAWAHA

[north miami]

Planners & Consultants

I recall an instance during my tenure on a St Johns River Water Managementent District Advisory Committee.
A local Planning group office conference room was selected by the District for meeting location.We conducted one meeting at that location.Future unfolding River and Community impacts were clearly posted in the conference room.
I made a point to check point in hopes of garnering Advisory Committee meeting privacy.
There was a backlash over the meeting location which the District heard loud and clear,although in hind sight perhaps we should have stay put!.......

Every single knock down,drag out Enviro/Community episode I have ever been involved in as a citizen and upper level Florida/Northeast Florida Wildlife Federation Board Member has been energized and driven by Planner & Consultant.

Beltway proceedings a dandy narrative.

[BridgeTroll]

Another angle that I do not believe we have touched on is WWII.  Many of the cities of Europe and Asia were essentially destroyed.  These countries had to rebuild their cities.  Transport needed to be public because that was the most cost effective for them.  These rebuilt cities are relatively modern in comparison the their "undestroyed and non rebuilt" American cities.  While they rebuilt their cities from the inside out... we simply expanded. 

Why?

Land was cheap and easy. New homes on that land were modern and affordable.  Transportation moved towards private auto rather than public conveyance because we didn't need to use it.

Interesting angle BT and I'd agree with the point that Europe and Asia both were able to pick up the pieces with the best available technology of the era. That however doesn't explain my sojourn in Colombia, Panama, Brasil ETC. where I found many cities, Medellin for example, to be FAR ahead of Jacksonville in almost every way. Transit, Water, Medical/EMS, Airport, Offices, Residential, Parks... and on and on. Nobody has ever bombed them back to the stone age as we did with Japan and Germany and over all they are poorer then either of them, yet they excel. What are we missing here?

OCKLAWAHA

No doubt Ock.  I can only say that every country or regions circumstances and development is different.  I will revert back to a couple points in an attempt to explain it.  We are a very large country.  Back in the day... we saw no reason to confine ourselves to the "city limits".  We were relatively rich and we did not forsee any boundaries.  Public transport not only wasn't wanted... it wasn't needed.  With the benefit of hindsight we see that those decisions and attitudes were wrong. 

[dougskiles]

Something else to consider when looking back and assessing where we went wrong; we always believe that what we know now is correct.  How many times do we say "if I knew then what I know now, I wouldn't have done these things.  We were misguided."

So, that has me questioning, what are we so sure about today that we will look back on as the absolutely wrong thing to do?

[BridgeTroll]

No doubt Ock.  I can only say that every country or regions circumstances and development is different.  I will revert back to a couple points in an attempt to explain it.  We are a very large country.  Back in the day... we saw no reason to confine ourselves to the "city limits".  We were relatively rich and we did not forsee any boundaries.  Public transport not only wasn't wanted... it wasn't needed.  With the benefit of hindsight we see that those decisions and attitudes were wrong.

Im sorry my friend, but when you make statements of this kind, you should preface them with "I assume"  or "I would guess", that way you have the benefit of simply being mistaken rather than saying something that is utterly false, as this statement is.

Pubic Transportation was built right into the foundation of all of our major cities. 

What was uncommon was private transportation other than horses, and even then horses tended to be pretty expensive to buy and maintain.

Unless your statement is a vague assumption on your part, where on earth did you get the idea that public transportation infrastructure was either unwanted or unnecessary.

What Ock is trying to get to, is that none of the other countries went through the same kinds of self dismantlement than we did.

Agreed.  It is an assumption on my part... and clearly public transportation was built into all the major cities.  I am referring to the rise of suburbs.  The existing public transport was not extended into these areas.  The question is why?  I will go back to the video you offered earlier as a reason.  People wanted the technology, convenience, and freedom that private conveyance offers.  We often use the term "unintended consequences" and a consequence of our desires for private conveyance cost us public transport.  We as a people abandoned public for private.

[tufsu1]

Every single knock down,drag out Enviro/Community episode I have ever been involved in as a citizen and upper level Florida/Northeast Florida Wildlife Federation Board Member has been energized and driven by Planner & Consultant.

driven by a planner & consultant? perhaps you mean by their clients?

for those interested, certified planners are required to follow a code of ethics....you can find it here:

http://planning.org/ethics/ethicscode.htm

note that #1 is a nebuolus concept....#2 is much more clearly defined.

[BridgeTroll]

What would we do without social progressives?  They surely did a good job of selling the idea of low density.  I am certainly not arguing that all that happened.  I guess my definition of the rise of suburbia as we know it began post WWII.  This "new" version of suburbia clearly had no plans for mass transit.

[Dog Walker]

Cheap cars and cheap gas were a major driver too.  Europe had to import all of its oil so taxed the devil out of it to prevent trade imbalances and currency outflow.  Driving was expensive and public transport was supported by those high gas taxes. 

The US had its own oil so our gas was and still is cheap.  A couple of economists have pointed out that having oil under your ground has proved to be a curse for most countries.  It has saddled us with a car dependent infrastructure and the need to prop up and protect corrupt regimes around the world to keep it flowing.