Leadership in a New Era By Arthur C. Nelson

Nelson's article reports a series of projections on population age, size and housing preference and implications thereby. He projects that by 2025 there will be a dramatic shift in the number of people over 65 and the housing preferences, need for access to facilities, and a crisis in the suburbs. He points out that right now there is an under supply of compact/mixed use/pedestrian and transit orientation development. The major causes:

Binding regulatory constraints (such as zoning)

Lending policies that favor conventional development and limit the supply of alternatives to sprawl.

What Nelson does particularly well, is predict the issues that will face the suburbs during this shift to urban living. He points out that homes in the suburbs will become less desirable and this can cause a number of things to happen. The people living in these houses, who expected their homes to be increasingly valuable assets, will actually end up with depreciating assets when they are ready to sell and move closer to the amenities they need. It will also leave older people in poorly maintained suburban homes on large lots. Some younger folks will experience their mortgages becoming more costly than the value of their home and will choose to default as a result.

Another scenario is that, as these homes become cheaper and city living becomes more expensive, the homes in the suburbs will be subdivided putting added stress on the infrastructure of suburban schools and amenities.


He points out that a major problem to reducing the outcomes he foresees is the fact that most zoning controls in the uter suburbs inhibit renewal and this facilitate decline.

Some projections:
between 2000 and 2025 37 million new residents, accounting for 55% of the nation's overall growth, will live in metropolitan areas. The outer suburbs will grow by about 25 million, equal to about 2/3 projected growth.

He describes two templates for this growth:

Central Cities and First Tier Suburbs

"Being in the center of their metropolitan regions, central cities and first-tier suburbs are poised to absorb a large share of growth over the next 20 years. I estimate that central counties in metropolitan areas larger than one million residents in 2000 (which are reasonable proxy for central cities and their first-tier suburbs) will grow by at least 12 million between 2000 and 2025, absorbing about 20% of the nation's overall growth."

Thereby planners must capitalize on infill and redevelopment opportunities. They must engage stakeholders in working out general land use parameters. He uses Arlington, Virginia as a successful case study of transit oriented development.

He shares an intersting point of view on downtowns, explaining that it won't be all about them because there are different nodes at transit stops, but they are a niche and planners can help position the "to attract a share of the future population."

Outer Suburbs

Nelson stresses the importance of redevelopment opportunities in suburbs. He attributes this to his projection that metro areas with one million in pop will grow to have twenty five million. Planners must give these suburbs realistic projections of land use needs so they can plan for these future populations. They must answer these questions:
Land zoned for large lots--is this a reality?
Can the community sustain itself fiscally with large lot zones and weakening demand for them?
Can they assess housing demand in outer suburban communities realistically?

Planners must provide the leadership neccesary to encourage creative housing solutions (e.g. accessory dwelling units and inclusionary zoning--esp affordable housing).


Suburban communities have some opportunities such as heir land bases--planners can use this to create a niche market attractive to those who value open space.

Commercial spaces in the suburbs are usually owned by one person, and these spaces are usually redeveloped or converted within twenty years and low rise office building in sixty, the opportunity to convert these buildings will probably arise. Planners should seize this opportunity to make these spaces take on more intensive use.

He summarizes his suggestions saying, "The challenge for planners in the outer suburbs is to organize land uses and infrastructure investments to meet the curreent development pressures while preparing for future sown cycles and shifts in market demand. There may be little time to waste."



Barriers

Planners should question whether land uses should be separated at all.

Innovations such as form based codes and conceptualized pre-platting permit a high quality built environment that anticipates change.

Communities should consider using financial incentives and consesions to encourage redevelopmet they want in the long term, but whose rates of return would be insufficient to attract investors. Tax abatement, fee waivers, tax-increment financing, below-market financing, and other techniques could be considered, all of which have low to moderate risks for government.

When reviewing development proposals requiring land use decisions, communities should consider how easily the proposed development might be converted to serve other uses once the intended use is no longer viable.

Institutional Challenges

Homeownership is favored over renting.

The property tax system penalizes land improvements and encourages speculation leading to inefficient land use patters. As a solution, Nelson suggest that land should be taxed based on its highest market value resulting in lower speculation and more compact development. This would also give planning a more powerful role.

Regional and metropolitan governance systems should be modernized. Decision making should be regional (I think that's what he is saying).



Overall, this is an important and well written article.