Old John

I came across this great article from the UCLA journal of Critical Planning, Spring 1999 (pages 119-122) entitled, Six Roads to Perdition by John Friedmann, Professor Emeritus, at UCLA (copy permission pending. Just so we're clear, until my copy request comes through, I had nothing to do with this, so please don't sue me!)

It's refreshing, even iconoclastic, to hear a rather tongue-in-cheek evaluation of the constantly self-contradictory world of planning. Does one focus on theory or real-world work experience? GIS or Lewis Mumford?! Especially from someone who is in a position to give out advice-

Professor Emeritus John Friedmann's response to the query-
From both your knowledge of UCLA and your new perspective 'down under," how do you see planning?

1. The seduction of "being parochial"
The Great Seducer murmurs into your ear: Think local, act local. All the universe is in a grain of sand. Los Angeles (or name any other city) is a huge laboratory for aspiring planners. Work in it. Discover it. Why bother with anywhere else? There is so little time.
And Old John replies: Time is scarce, but the world is wide. Los Angeles is only one dot on the map and doesn't foreshadow what's in store for any other city. Look beyond the horizon if you want to know your own backyard. Without knowing about other places, and how they are different from where you live, study, and work, you lack perspective and your capacity for innovative thinking is restricted to what's before you. Learn about planning cities and regions in Asia, for example, where most of the world's urbanization will take place in the coming century. Then return to look at Los Angeles with new yes, with a vision trained to see differences and similarities. Planning is increasingly a cosmopolitan profession.

2. The seduction of "community" The Great Seducer murmurs into your ear: Work in the community, for the community, become a part (119) of it all. This is how you can be a radical planner. Think people; think small; build communities. Don't be a patsy to Big Capital. And Old John replies: You don't build communities with only people. And the city is more than a mosaic of neighborhoods, each separated from its surroundings by a moat. If you want to fight poverty, you've got to think beyond the locality to the region which it supports. Impoverished neighborhoods- communities- can do a few things for themselves, but they can't create paying jobs, they can't substitute for services which only the city can provide. Discover how the regional and the local connect; learn how region connects to region in a global system; find out the dynamics of regional change. Planners must learn to think and work at different scales. No single scale is sufficient unto itself.

3. The seduction of "learning by doing" The Great Seducer murmurs into your ear: get out there and practice; get real. That's the only way you ever learn anything worthwhile. Forget about books. Practice is all you need. Do projects; and when you've done one, do another and another. Until you master the art of city planning. And Old John replies: practice-based planning education can take you only part of the way to where you want to go. You need theoretical understandings, too. You need to get to know the tacit theories that inform your and other planners' practice. You need to find out how people elsewhere have confronted problems different from those you want to solve. Some ways of posing problems are better than others. There are principles to be learned. The issue is how to find the right balance between theoretical learning and practice.

4. The seduction of "unreflected practice" The Great Seducer murmurs into your ear: Don't bother with planning theory; that's nothing but blabber, a bunch of overage white academics writing to entertain each other. No practitioner can afford to waste (120) time reading them. Just go out and practice; you'll be all right. And Old John replies: How do you know what is good practice? Have you thought about the different practices of planning? Have you already figured out how planning relates to other knowledges and practices? Do you understand how knowledge is created and legitimized? And think about this. What ethical norms should guide you as a planner? Why are theorists talking about the "communicative turn" in planning? and when they do, what are they leaving out? What does it mean to be reflective about one's professional practice? And how shall we reflect on it? Planning theory (and the history of planning properly understood) provides a forum for rethinking a practice that should never be applied as if all the routines of planning were already settled. Can you learn to be a good planner by reading only a textbook of planning?

5. The seduction of "methods" The Great Seducer murmurs into your ear: You are insecure. You ask: Do I have a future in planning? And so, because you feel insecure, you have a hunger for skills that will get you your first job. You want to learn the skills that are prized in the marketplace. You're right. Load up on them: do stats and modeling and GIS and social surveys. Go and study finance and learn how to put a budget together and how to finance big real estate operations. Don't waste your time in seminars discussing theories that have only fuzzy answers. if they have any at all. it's hard methods that will get you ahead in the world. And Old John replies: Don't be fooled by this craze for "how do I do this or that." What's the good of knowing "how" if you don't know the "what" or "why" of practice? Indeed, what is the problem to be solved? What are the different readings on it? Who wants it solved? And why? Is it the planner's job to second-guess the market, to build in advance of the market, or what? Methods are the least problematical aspect of planning. You can run statistical regressions until you drop and still not know what the (121) problem is, what should be done (if anything), and why taking on this problem is important. There are generic skills, like writing, public speaking, doing graphics, working with people in small groups, and mediating conflicts, which are useful in all situations planners are likely to face. But beyond that...go slow on methods until you know what problems you want to solve. Your time might be better spent on all those fuzzy theories that give you a headache, worrying about the what and the why.

6. The seduction of "theory" The Great Seducer murmurs into your ear: Theory is what the smartest people do. It's a game you, too, will enjoy. We can spend hours, weeks, months, a lifetime talking about words: lifeworld, simulacra, thirdspace, deconstruction, discourse analysis, untraded interdependencies, flexible accumulation, communicative action, heterotopia, epistemology, differance, embodiment, and so on and so forth in an endless stream of infinitely fascinating writings. Without them you are truly lost, can't find your way. Planning you can always learn on the job. While you are studying. It's theory you should go for. And Old John replies: Theory is good, but practice is also good. You must have both if you want to be a planner. Theory informs practice and vice versa. Without the synapse to practice, theory is an addiction. The test of a good theory is: will it help me in my practice? If it doesn't, leave theory to the social, human, and cultural sciences. Planners need good theories to think about cities and regions as well as about their own practice. The trick is to connect them to the objects of planning.

John Friedmann lives in Melbourne, Australia. His current research interests include the development of cities and regions in the Pacific Rim.

be the change that you want to see in the world

I am fascinated by what happens after a disaster, be it natural, or God forbid, man-made.

I was old enough to be cogniscent of FEMA's incredibly embarassing and frankly, damningly inept, managing of what happened post-Hurricane Katrina. This was these people's JOBS! They're the ones that are supposed to be the go-to guys when things like this happen! A lot of criticism has been said already against this total miscarriage of any form of civic responsibility, so I wouldn't dwell on it too much.

But what perversely interested me was what did they do with all of those people? Where did they house them? How did they provide for their basic needs? Suffice to say, lodging them in the Superdome was an unorthodox, though I wouldn't go so far as to say inspired, move.

(It still infuriates me that despite this epic mishandling of the situation there are still people who have not been able to return home to New Orleans, but that'll be another post.)

When a disaster hits, it often affects people's homes. What was once a sanctuary is now merely rubble. One of our basic needs as humans is for shelter, and when that is taken away, it can feel like losing a limb.

An organization that is seeking to address both post-disaster housing needs and low-income and Third World housing needs is an amazing organization called, Architecture for Humanity. Founded in 1999 by Cameron Sinclair and Kate Stohr, they are "a grassroots nonprofit organization that seeks architectural solutions to humanitarian crises." (-taken from the back flap of Design Like You Give a Damn) They have written a book called, Design Like You Give a Damn, which spotlights various projects around the world that seek to address issues like shelter, both in post-disaster situations and for people in Third World countries and other places that cannot afford big fancy homes.

I love what Ganhdi once said, "Be the change that you want to see in the world." It's simple, but profound and should be adopted by everyone who does care to give a damn.

There is still so much wrong in this world, but I like to think that what Oscar Wilde once said is true, "They say that the age of miracles is past. I say it has not yet begun."

There are many gifted, innovative designers out there who realize that true greatness may not be achieved constructing the new blockbuster museum or multi-millionaire's home, but instead providing cheap but safe and dignified housing to people less fortunate than ourselves.

I have so many different areas that I want to focus on as an urban planner- sustainable land use, downtown/post-industrial revitalization, mixed-income housing. But I would like to think that I will also be able to devote some of my energies to helping those who cannot help themselves.

For more information on Architecture for Humanity please go to http://www.architectureforhumanity.org/ Thank you.

The suburbs- save me a spot? Or when pigs fly I'll hire them as my movers

I am curious to know how many of my peers are considering moving to the suburbs, either in the future, are there now, or will never set foot there except to visit friends.

I am also curious as to what influenced their decision.

I have a friend who was born and raised in Chicago, and except for a stint in Mexico and college in Michigan, she has spent her whole life in the Windy City. She said one time that the only way she would ever leave Chicago is in a pine box.

I have another friend who grew up in the rareified air of suburban CT. She didn't mind it as a kid, but finds it stifling now. She is currently in L.A., but the non-stop traffic is getting to her. I think she'd be happiest in San Francsisco, as she is very environmentally-oriented, but as it is so expensive to live up there, one needs an iron-clad job or very flexible outlook toward housing. Four extra roommates anyone? Rent'll only be $3000/month each! Utilties not included.

In a prior post I noted that, I think, that most people of my generation have always assumed that the suburbs have always existed. I would like to take this one step farther and ask, how many people see themselves living in the subrubs in the future?

I don't care if you see yourself in a suburb of the city that you live now, or would like to live in A suburb, just not one of your current city's outlying ones. My question is simply, do you see yourself living in the suburbs? And if so, why?

If it's because the industry in which you work is out there, please note as such. If you want/have kids and want a good education for them, please remark on this.

There is a new ad for State Farm of a late-twenty-something guy, who bears a slight resemblance to Dominic Monaghan's character on the TV show, Lost. He's tattooed and looks vaguely edgy, but he also has a baby on his hip, HIS baby. And looking at that ad I realized, omygoth, all those life insurance ads are now being targeted at my demographic.

I realize that this is the age when people start to settle down- ALL of my friends with whom I have kept in touch from grammar school are married- a few have kids. But my question is, how many people will be trekking it out the suburbs? And how soon?

My favorite place in the whole world

I am constantly searching for "home." Having moved around a lot as a kid, I never really put down roots. I tried one time then had to leave for another place. But when I returned 3 years later I found that too much had changed for it to still feel familiar. Check out John Michlig's blog, Sprawled Out: the Search for Community in the American Suburb, and his post, "Re-visiting my hometown: Wausau, Wisconsin through new eyes" to see what I'm talking about. Man, it's surreal seeing your old, old hometown on someone else's blog.

But then I found "home" in the most unlikely place ever, Rome.

I'd dreamed of going to Rome ever since I was young. And I had the chance to go when I was between my junior and senior years of college. I was able to live in Venice (Venezia), Florence (Firenze), and Rome (Roma) for 1 week each. Unfortunately, I was there for school credit and my professors insisted on getting us up at what felt like the crack of dawn and dragging us all around these magnificent cities. While this process was exhilirating at first, after all who wants to sleep when one can see the canals of Venice in person!? The cradle of the Renaissance, Florence?! By the time I got to Rome I thought I was going to fall over from exhaustion.

Unfortunately, I partook of many a siesta during our free time while in the Eternal City. I was bone-tired, I didn't speak the language, and I was running low on film and suitcase space- the two things I compulsively do when on vacation- take a million pictures and buy stuff. Actually, I do that every day, but it's really bad when I'm in another country :-)

However, I could navigate myself to the Piazza Navona from our hotel, the Alberge del Sole, which was crammed in a little alley just downwind from the Campo de Fiori. I loved the Piazza Navona with Bernini's magnificent personifications of four of the known rivers at that time, the Nile, the Ganges, the Danube, and the Rio de la Plata, housed in his magnificent work, the Fontana dei Quattro Fiumi or "Fountain of the Four Rivers," as they cower beneath the frontal facade of Borromini's church, Sant'Agnese in Agone. (Forgive me, once an art history dork, always an art history dork.)

I love how wide the space felt, like one is standing in a Baroque football field. And I loved the street artists, selling their works and the modest storefronts who deferred to the artistic creations that filled the square.

Then, a few years later, my grandparents offered to take my mom and myself to Italy with them. I lept at the change, though acutely distressed at the thought that I would not past muster in regards to navigating as we would spend the majority of our time in Rome, the city with which I was the least familiar. Though if you want a quiet bed, I know just the place, double entendres aside.

But somehow I did it. Downtown Rome is actually not terribly difficult to navigate, there are several main streets that wind around this magnificent city and this makes orienting one's self significantly easier, even if you don't speak the language, which I still didn't the second time around.

And I felt such a rush taking them from the Campo dei Fiori where we were dropped off, and pointing out with pride the restaurant, Heartbreakers, where I enjoyed a delectable spaghetti carbonara and then walking down the small, cramped alley in which my old hotel was still wedged, then crossing the Vittorio Emmanuele and making my way back "home. "

It was all still there, the Church, the Fountain, the other fountains, the restaurants, etc., It's funny, something in Italy is always under construction and when I was there the first time Sant'Agnese in Agone was covered under plastic and scaffolding. The second time it was the Fontana dei Quattro Fiumi that was shrouded. This couldn't take away from the gorgeous site that is and hopefully will always be the Piazza Navona.

It's hard to explain, but it just felt like home to me. I suppose it's like true love, when you find it, you just know. Or that's what Hollywood would like me to believe.

For anyone who cares, yes, the Piazza Navona was cited in Dan Brown's book, Angels and Demons. According to Wikipedia, it will also be used in the forthcoming movie. You can also see it in Mike Nichols' cinematic adaptation of Catch-22 and it was in the 1990 version of Coins in the Fountain. The 1954 version used the Trevi Fountain. (information provided by Wikipedia)

But please see it in person! You will not regret it! And try not to think about how your taxi driver probably took you on the most roundabout, i.e. unnecessarily expensive, taxi ride to get you there. This isn't NY, it's Italy! You may never return- cough up that euro and go see some art!

On the Street Where You Live

I want to open up a dialogue- how do you feel about your city? What would you change? What do you love?

Having lived in 11 places I'm highly attuned to a "sense of place"- be it good or bad. But I want to know if other people, especially, non urban planners, ever stop to take stock of how their city "feels." LA can feel "cold," NY is frentic, Boston can be a little full of its self, Chicago is the ignored, underachieving sibling of the jock older sibling, but still rocks out in its own way. "Second City?" Pshaw- we survived the Great Fire of 1871!!! Etc.,

Talk amongst yourselves!

Traffic

Singles

What is an urban planner?

Some people who are generous enough to read this blog wonder what does an urban planner do? In short, an urban planner wears many hats!

I confess to having a short attention span when it comes to careers, and variety is definitely the spice of my life. Well, that and cilantro. . . but one of the reasons that drew me to the field of planning is that an urban planner doesn't do just one thing. He or she must be well-versed in a variety of areas.

Although I don't officially have a degree in this field yet, I was able to talk with several professionals in the field including: Paul Scheibel, AICP, principal planner for the city of Visalia, CA, Paul Bernal, associate planner for the city of Visalia, CA, Greg F. Collins, partner at Collins & Schoettler, and Charles Clouse, principal of TPG Consulting. I would like to thank them for their time and their generosity in giving me a glimpse into their professional world.

(it should also be noted that none of these are listed in order of importance:)
It could be said that an urban planner is one part civil engineer, one part architect, a little bit of a landscape architect, a geographer, certainly an unofficial economist, an amateur sociologist, an environmentalist, and definitely a diplomat.

An urban planner may help determine if we're getting another Starbucks or hookah bar, but he or she also has to collaborate with the civil engineers regarding the size of the parking lots, waste management, street lights, etc., It wouldn't hurt an urban planner to know how said Starbucks or hookah bar, the actual structure, is constructed so he or she can talk rooflines, foundations, and so forth with the architect(s), contractor(s), and developer(s). And of course, more green never hurt anyone, so if an urban planner can speak knowledgeably about the type of landscaping involved in a new project, including water management, irrigation, etc., more power to him or her. Also being aware of the type of soil, elevation, and other elements that turn on a geographer is important. Not to mention the hot buttons that will be pushed when the environmental folks come to weigh in. Did the urban planner know that there is an endangered little frog that has his little welcome mat laid out where that new Target wants to be? The urban planner better know.

He or she also better know if this new Target is within the city's best interests, thereby donning his or her economist's thinking cap. An urban planner is also a bit of a sociologist- gauging the "feel" of the people in the city he or she works for, or the type of people that will utilize the project he or she is working on if he or she is in the private sector. And finally, if nothing else, an urban planner is a diplomat.

He or she must sit in on town meetings, if he or she works for the city and have to explain and cajole people into accepting whatever proposed plan is, in fact, a win-win for everyone. Getting people to come around to this point of view is not nearly as easy as it sounds. Remember asking Mom or Dad if you could stay out until 11 PM on a school night when you were in high school? Imagine M & D x 200. Keep smiling and nodding and perhaps they'll come around to see your side.

These are the main roles I was able to ascertain an urban planner must fill, and doubtless, he or she feels like they are asked to be a miracle-worker on some days. But it is the very challenge of wearing so many hats and being knowledgeable of so many varied fields that invigorates me and makes me want to plunge in headfirst into the field of literally shaping the future!

It never rains in California, but we've got problems all our own!

I've lived in 11 places (and counting) in 25 years and the majority of my research into urban planning has focused on Midwestern and Northeastern cities. I did attend college in Savannah, GA, but the South's relationship to growth defies categorization. Apparently, Houston is one of the hot new places to be, according to an op-ed in Newsweek, June 22, 2008 www.newsweek.com/id/142633 Doesn't make it any less humid in summer yet so cold it snows in winter, it's like the Midwest, but with a drawl. . .

Also, having gone to school in Savannah, and having family in Matthews, NC, a suburb of Charlotte, I've seen first-hand the incredible growth that Charlotte and Atlanta are experiencing. Savannah too, is enjoying its revival, thanks in part to my alma mater's decision to build a downtown campus, but it doesn't have nearly the growth patterns that Atlanta is experiencing.

But I didn't realize that Los Angeles has challenges, uniquely all its own, which warrant its own metropolitan policy until I came across this excellent document, put forth by USC.

Summary Report
USC Southern California Studies Center
Urban Policy Seminar Series 2001–2002
Moderated by Antonio Villaraigosa & Jennifer Wolch

Principal Authors
William Fulton
Jennifer Wolch
Antonio Villaraigosa
Susan Weaver
Co-Sponsored by:
USC Center for Sustainable Cities
USC Lusk Center for Real Estate
With support from:
USC Urban Initiative
The John Randolph and Dora Haynes Foundation

In their report the authors recommend that Los Angeles adopt a "5-point action plan for metropolitan L.A.," which is as follows:

Grow Smarter:
As the region runs out of land, we must learn to use our land and resources better
and more efficiently to accommodate future growth.
■ Level the Playing Field for Infill Development
■ Encourage Housing Construction and Homeownership
■Manage the Car

Grow Safer: As we continue to add population in existing neighborhoods and communities, it becomes imperative to improve their safety.
■ Connect Public Safety to the Neighborhood
■ Balance Gang Suppression with Prevention and Intervention
■ Improve Safety in Transportation
■ Prioritize Earthquake Preparedness

Grow Greener: The region’s metropolitan development in the 20th Century inflicted great harm on the natural environment. In order to sustain metropolitan L.A. in the 21st Century, we must actively focus on restoring the natural environment rather than merely refraining from damaging it more.
■ Conserve Energy and Natural Resources
■ Promote Environmental Justice
■ Make the Metropolis More Permeable

Grow Together: As our region has expanded, it has also grown inequitably. The gap between rich and poor has become wider, as has the gap between the well-being of different communi- ties in the region. In the 21st Century, our growth must be more equitably
distributed, both economically and geographically.
■ Narrow the Economic Divide
■ Promote Equitable Economic Development at the Regional Level
■ Connect Neighborhoods to Regional Job Opportunities

Grow More Civic Minded: We cannot accomplish any of the other four goals without nurturing greater civic-
mindedness and commitment among the people of our region, especially immigrants
and others often excluded from participation in public affairs.
■ Broaden Civic Involvement
■ Know More about the Region and Its Communities
■ Create Benchmarks to Measure Progress

Obviously, they go into more details in their report. But I found the regionally-specific circumstances fascinating and I have now shifted my focus in emphasis on what I want to do as a planner.

Gentrification

Gentrification is a seemingly benign word, but it has insidious connotations like yuppie and Barnes and Noble- about the latter I am totally kidding. I probably love the Noble Barn more than life itself.

But gentrification can be like a cancer. At first you don't notice it until you realize its sweeping effect and the prospect of returning to life as you knew it is pretty bleak.

I won't bore you with the details of the history of gentrification. But Wikipedia has a well-written article on the subject.

Suffice to say, gentrification is everywhere. Clearly, its symptoms are most manifest in major cities where there are more areas that fall into economic decline stranding the economically-challenged, making it unable for them to leave, then poor students/starving artists, who prefer cheap rent over a cool zip code move in, then the bohemians and (ugh) hipsters follow their lead, making the place all boho-chic with their restaurants and galleries. And soon Parker and Ashleigh have caught the whiff of la boheme and are snapping up condos and causing the rents to skyrocket. Meanwhile, the students and all the bohemians who are still slinging coffee at Starbucks and not able to cash in on all these nouveau money are priced out of the very areas they, unintentionally, helped revive. To say nothing of the financially poor people who were undoubtedly forced out as the beatniks were moving in with their bongos.

(a sidenote- there is an interesting book on the students and bohemians who help lend an air of bonhomie to the gentrified areas, yet are priced out of living in the areas whose atmospheres they cultivate. It's called Neo-Bohemia: Art and Commerce in the Postindustrial City by: Richard Lloyd. I admit I haven't read it yet and the guy himself didn't actually live in Wicker Park, he was just a visiting sociologist, but he does make valid points. Available at amazon.com)

It's weird, even disorienting for people who've lived in an area long enough to remember when it wasn't advisable to be in Lincoln Park or Silver Lake after dark, and now it's the place to be seen after hours.

But this is happening in cities that frankly aren't as hip as say, Chicago or New York. In Milwaukee, for example, the downtown, slight as it may be, and frankly charming, has experienced an economic revival thanks to the reclaiming of the Historic Third Ward, which has ushered in many a chic cafe and boutique along with warehouses-turned-artists' lofts, a thought that was definitely foreign in 1970. Recommended dining: go to the Ale House on the river front. Their food and micro-brews are awesome and situated on the river makes for excellent summer dining. I also should point out that the East Side, Walker's Point, and Bay View are also all experiencing a revitalization according to local sources.

And if you're there check out Milwaukee's Art Museum, or MAM, which boasts the honor of being Santiago Calatrava's first American commission. If you're feeling especially intrepid, be there when the museum opens and the "wings" of the Calatrava addition "open."

Every time one seems new evidence of gentrification one assumes that it will go on and on ad infinitium. But I have enclosed a link to a fascinating article called, "the Embers of Gentrification" by Adam Stenbergh, from New York Magazine, 11-12-2007, which postulates that this may not be carved in granite (countertops).

This article in an extremely well written format examines the dying out of a former hot-spot. I haven't been to Red Hook recently, so I can't attest to its current state. But it is interesting to consider that the phenomenon of gentrification may not self-perpetuating forever and ever? There may be light at the end of the Pottery Barn J. Crew yuppie tunnel? The knob on the door is probably from Restoration Hardware, but if it stops the vicious cycle, I'll do whatever it takes to knock that sucker down!

Gentrification is particularly disheartening to the people who have lived in an area and enjoy its scruffy non-homogenized charm. San Francisco, one of my spiritual homes in the US, has fallen victim to gentrification thanks to the tech boom that caused rents to reach the stratosphere and caused the literal mass exodus of hundreds of artists.

Another recommended book is Hollow City: the Siege of San Francisco and the Crisis of American Urbanism by: Rebecca Solnit and Susan Schwartzenberg.

Even though we are currently facing a recession, prices for real estate in San Francisco remain astronomically high. Again, this is an example of gentrification's cancerous-like effect. I have family friends where the father commutes two hours each way (!) every day to work in the city. And it's not due to lack of good schooling, if you can afford to send your kids to school in San Francisco proper, they'll be getting some of the best education in the nation.

Chicago is another example. Gentrification has swept through at a wildfire-like pace. Only one example is Lincoln Park, which used to be a rougher section of town. Now you'd never know that walking down North Ave. (which actually runs east-west, but whatever) One is flocked by Crate and Barrel, J. Crew, Pottery Barn, Whole Foods, Victoria's Secret, etc.,- a yuppie's nirvana.

Downtown revival

There is a great book called Downtown, Inc.: How America Rebuilds Cities by Bernard J. Frieden and Lynne B. Sagalyn that I picked up completely by accident at a great bookstore on Haight Street in San Francisco. (Forever After Books, 1475 Haight St.) Although it is a little dated, (original publishing date July 1, 1991) it details how some of the downtown shopping centers and public centers came to be through public entrepreneurship and public-private entrepreneurship.
Again, a little history is in order. During/after the Industrial Revolution people did their shopping downtown, as that is where everyone lived and the suburbs were not even a twinkle in a developer's eye. But once the suburbs came to be, people did their shopping in the suburbs because that's where they lived.

In fact, people began to stay away from the downtowns- for numerous reasons. As more and more prosperous people moved away from the downtowns, people began to see the declining downtowns as dirty, dangerous, stressful to navigate, and parking was non-existent. However characteristics were absent in sunny, sterile suburbia while ample parking abounded.

People used to shop the downtown department stores, but even some of the major department stores packed up for greener pastures. And while some stores stayed, ensconced in their beautiful buildings, some never recovered from the economic blow. Chicago's beautiful Carson Pierre Scott building, designed by Chicago architect, Louis Sullivan (inventor of the skyscraper and mentor to Frank Lloyd Wright) closed its beautiful iron doors last year, February 21, 2007.

My alma mater's library, the Jen Library, in Savannah, GA is housed in a former downtown department store.

And don't get some people started on what they would consider nothing short of a bastardization of their beloved Chicago institution Marshall Field's being turned into another Macy's. The building has not been altered except for cosmetic signage, but the feeling has changed.

Obviously, it need be pointed out that some flagship stores, such as Saks Fifth Avenue and Bloomingdale's in New York never left, they only expanded. But other department stores, some of equal status, others much lower, closed their doors, even in the cities of their birth.

However, some urban planners and intrepid developers thought that they could lure the crowds back to the very places that they had fled. Part of this was due to the fact that many national stores had overextended themselves in suburbia and needed new markets.

Like I said, this book is a little dated and it's weird thinking of shopping areas like Chicago's Water Tower Place as anything but a tourist stop along the Magnificent Mile if you've been there in the past five years. But historically it's fascinating reading learning about the steps needed to be taken to bring to life some of the urban market places that seem so commonplace now, but were innovative for their time. Boston's Quincy Market is cited. As is Seattle's Pike Place Market and many other locations that thanks to these successful efforts.

This is not to say that this movement has not had its critics. (Jeff Ferrell and his work, Tearing Down the Streets: Adventures in Urban Anarchy is one particularly vitrolic example. I had a hard time trying to see his side of the story I was so busy wiping the angry spittle that emanated from the pages. )

This is not to say that a new shopping center is the cure-all, Band-Aid solution for every ailing downtown in America, but say what you will about building downtown shopping centers. If nothing else it points to the enduring spirit of capitalism and its power to wrest many a city back from the edge thanks to America's never-ending quest for stuff and novelty.

Urban renewal, not as good as it sounds

If you are reading this, you have survived my rant about how the suburbs came to be (thoughts on the dreaded sprawl later).

Well, dear reader, suffice to say that the lure of the suburbs was strong, mighty strong and after we kicked Nazi butt in World War II masses of people, enticed by the new roads and cheap mortgage rates, headed out to the suburbs.

Unfortunately, not everyone was able to claim a stake in this utopia. Those who were poor, and were often a minority race as well, were left in the cities. Because of their economic status conditions tended to slide toward the not good side. Repairs went untended, crime increased, and downtown/inner cities began to acquire the unfair (and often untrue) reputation that has plagued them to this day- dirty and dangerous.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions and the urban planners of the late 1940's through the 1970's, and even into the early 1980's looked at the disrepair that our nation's cities had fallen into and decided that it was cheaper to pull the plug, if you will, then perform triage. So that's exactly what they did. Veiled under the innocuous title of "urban renewal," many cities bulldozed blighted areas. In some cases they provided vouchers for the soon-to-be-displaced residents. In other cases, taking advantage of the people's lack of political power, they simply steamrolled their way, both literally and figuratively.

Leaving behind vacant lots, some of which are still vacant to this day. One need only drive around Kanye West's old stompin' grounds, Lawndale, Chicago, to see what I am talking about. I lived there for a few months and it is a tough and gritty place, where children are still raised and grow, but rarely escape.

The problem with vacant lots is that it can increase crime. And indeed it did. Empty lots became prime drug dealing grounds, ideal locations for gang wars, dirty needles, etc., This is similar to the "Broken Windows" theory from Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in Our Communities by: George L. Kelling and Catherine Coles. The book, in turn, was based on an article entitled "Broken Windows" by James Q. Wilson amd George L. Kelling, which was published in the Atlantic Monthly March 1982 (information courtesy of wikipedia.org). In a nutshell, the broken window theory states that when a window goes unrepaired it shows a lack of pride in one's home, in one's neighborhood. This lets less-than-do-gooders know that other destructive activities are permissible. Therefore, if the windows aren't being repaired, then who's to say that anyone's going to call the cops if someone "shady" is in the neighborhood. Then "shady" people lead to drug dealers standing brazenly on the street corners and gang leaders strutting like they own the streets, which in all likelyhood they do because, if something as minor as a window isn't repaired, why would anyone bother to care about the big stuff either?

However, in the 1970's urban planning, with the benefit of hindsight, realized that urban renewal didn't deliver the way it had been proposed it would. But downtown cities were still in trouble.