Abstract
Human intervention especially in the form of the built environment had devastated vast acres of natural reserve. What was formerly abundant with floral and faunal population had been transformed into urban jungles all in the name of progress. However, recent developments in architecture and the built environment calls for designers and developers alike to become more conscientious when implementing development. Many emerging theories regarding sustainable architecture and urban development had sprouted throughout the years.
In urban planning standards, designers tend to designate private, public, semi-private and semi-public spaces according to their spatial characteristics and functions. However, some critical aspects are overlooked like social context, psychological impact and individual perceptions. The scales of differentiating private to public space include the following: spatial (body, home, neighborhood, city), degree of exclusivity and openness, and modes of social encounter (personal, interpersonal, impersonal) (Lawson).
The study will compare two selected cities in the United States that had recently undergone urban renewal as a response to the changing times. To support the study, a review of existing related literature is conducted. Finally, the two cities are compared using acceptable urban planning theories, Kevin Lynch’s mental maps of the city and new urbanism as criteria.
Introduction
Human intervention especially in the form of the built environment had devastated vast acres of natural reserve. What was formerly abundant with floral and faunal population had been transformed into urban jungles all in the name of progress. However, recent developments in architecture and the built environment calls for designers and developers alike to become more conscientious when implementing development. Many emerging theories regarding sustainable architecture and urban development had sprouted throughout the years.
Not all designers and developers were in a destructive mode as Aaron Betsky would put it. Many architects in the 20th century had already advocated measures to redress and perhaps re-direct the way man uses the environment for his survival. Some notable architects like Frank Lloyd Wright, Mies Van Der Rohe and Le Corbusier viewed architecture differently. The precepts of organic architecture had been the forerunner of what is now referred to as sustainable or environmentally responsive architecture. Man-made structures are undeniably intruding into the natural course of nature. When creating environmentally responsive structures, the designer must aim for the least intrusive and most environmentally viable creations. The designer must find ways to synthesize man-made creations with that of the environment.
Aside from the complicated task of sustainability, the architect-planner must also consider other factors involved in the inception and completion of a planning project. The key actors involved have varying opinions on how things must proceed. The planner as the lead professional must have firm ethical foundations or else the opinion of the dominant group may influence the entire process.
Statement of the Problem
In urban planning standards, designers tend to designate private, public, semi-private and semi-public spaces according to their spatial characteristics and functions. However, some critical aspects are overlooked like social context, psychological impact and individual perceptions. The scales of differentiating private to public space include the following: spatial (body, home, neighborhood, city), degree of exclusivity and openness, and modes of social encounter (personal, interpersonal, impersonal) (Lawson).
Background of the Problem
Impact of Urbanity in Modern Cities
Richard Sennett wrote in The Fall of Public Man, public life has undergone changes from the early Roman period to present times. He said that for the Romans, they believed that assuming public roles was a formal obligation and they performed that role passively. However, there was a shift in context from the public to spiritual point of view and they sought transformation by refocusing their energy internally. American post-industrial society had become introspective and privacy became imperative.
The Western societies’ preoccupation with privacy and individuality is evident in how elements of cities are conceived. During the 18th century London, coffee houses were venues where people can socialize without divulging private concerns. Sennett made a distinction between coffee houses and clubs. He said that the exclusivity of clubs heralded the beginning of the decline of public life. Before the civil liberties were established in American society, these clubs also connote racial exclusivity. But in today’s scenario, people are more concerned with creating communities rather than maintaining a public persona. Sennett attributed the “fall of the public man” to industrial capitalism. He described the changes in behavior, speech and fashion as evidences of privatization.
Pre-industrialized America had a public square where friends and strangers can socialize. The public square was a place where members of the community interact with each other. Other activities such as buying and selling also take place in public squares. Public squares were the life of the community. In sharp contrast, Sennett refers to post-WWII architecture as “dead public space”(125). Balance between the public and private domains has tipped and people lost their articulation of space. The conundrum of daily life eroded people’s artistic instinct and inclinations because “they are unable to tap the fundamental creative strength of the actor, the ability to play with and invest feeling in external images of self.” (Breault) “Capitalism and secularism” had eroded the sense of public life as a morally legitimate sphere (Kimball).
As economic activity spurred by capitalism broadens, people become more impersonal and their desire to live exclusively within their own realm becomes more pronounced. Alienation even among neighbors has become the norm in key cities. Capitalism, according to Sennett, encourages people to become introverted and self-centered. The meaning of commune has been loss because of financial and economic supremacy.
In the second half of the 19th century, large parcel of lands were converted into urban centers in major American cities like Boston, Chicago, New York, and San Francisco and later Buffalo, Detroit, Kansas City, Louisville, and Rochester (Banerjee 1+). Park systems offered an alternative landscape to the concrete jungle of American business districts. The public park like Central Park serves as an urban democratic venue. It also promotes civic pride, democracy and social compact that will engender a civil society.
In general, the private sector seems to dominate the socio-political aspect of a city’s character and development. Since private individuals or corporations operate majority of the public domains, they tend to work more closely with government in establishing codes and zoning. In recent years, gated communities proliferated in the United States. When people were asked about the preference, they expressed “need for safety and a search for community, presumably one that is based on homogeneity and cohesion.” The gated communities may allude to the exclusivity of “clubs” in the past where people feel more comfortable if they are with “people of their sort” (Banerjee p.1+).
There should not be any problems with the future of public spaces in cities. The future of public space was not a cause for a concern because these were experiencing growth in major American cities (Banerjee 1+). But there are three major trends that threaten to shrink the public places: Privatization, Globalization and Communication Revolution. The steady decline of public realms could be attributed to worldwide liberalism and downsizing governments. Majority of the public realms in key cities are owned and operated by private entities. This trend tends to make these formerly public realms like museums and galleries seem more exclusive and less publicly accessible. Conflicts between local government and the private sector may polarize local and global economy. Finally, people’s preoccupation with information technology development and the Internet may render the function of public realms obsolete.
To counteract the effects of these trends, governments and private sectors attempted to recover the lost glory of public realms. Shopping malls are now designed to encourage “hanging out” and “flaneur” as the French arcaded walks did (Banerjee 1+). The trend of disappearing public realms is in conjunction with the characteristics of cities experiencing the phenomena because of information technology innovations and privatization efforts, globalization and down-sizing. The privately managed public spaces presents to the public that they are indeed open and accessible to the public. But some form of controls, whether known or unknown to the public are installed like monitoring cameras and CCTV’s, security systems and other surveillance devices. Mike Davis cited them as “”fortress” environments. Because of their designs, locations, and management policies, for the most part corporate open spaces remain insular and mostly empty, save for perhaps a lunchtime crowd and occasional clusters of smokers.”(qtd in Banerjee 1+) Information technology devalued the function of parks, open spaces because it allow people to retreat into their enclaves rather than “socialize and actively participate in community activities.” (Banerjee 1+)
Contrary to the notion that highly urbanized cities are bustling cities, it is in fact a dead city if public domains are used as a criterion to define a city. Public domains clearly identifies with people interacting with each other. Barriers between people should be either non-existent or minimal. Most of the public domains of major cities all over the world had already been privatized as a result of globalization trends. Efforts should be made to recover the lost public domains of the city. The globalization trend that has taken the world by storm has greatly affected the feeling of community in American societies. Urban designers and planners should note the three threats to urban society when designing or re-designing cities. Public domains should not be merely instituted because it solves the problem of environmental congestion. Rather, public domains should exist because people exist and live in these locales.
The terrorist attack on September 11 further exacerbates the already xenophobic populace of America. Security measures imposed on certain areas are hardly conducive to creating public domains. Moreover, it encourages segregation or exclusivity. It is no secret that there are still enclaves that define exclusivity that is race related. The image of cities as the symbol of capitalism would make people associate it as people-unfriendly district. It is more likely a showcase of urban assembly of concrete sculptures rather than a humane and livable city.
Contemporary Urban Development Paradigm: The City of New York as a Global City
If the Greek’s public life is represented by agoras, then American capitalism is symbolized by the cityscape of New York. New York is sometimes portrayed in literature and even movies as a harsh place to live. A place where everybody is a stranger and community is uncommon. New York City nicknamed “The Big Apple” is home to 8.1 million people and is considered as the most densely populated city in the world. New York City developed from a newly discovered territory in 1609 to the most influential and powerful city in the world. New York rose from nothing to become the financial center of the world. The city attracts immigrants as they make up a third of the entire population. They are attracted to the culture, energy, cosmopolitanism, and economic opportunity that New York City offers.
New York like many cities has a highly visible and dominant public domain that reflects primarily commercial domains in the aspect of finance and tourism. These cities are largely maintained and organized by the private sector. New York is a typical city with a mix of public and private domains. Most cities developed because of the places, things and services that markets cannot provide exclusively. The city’s urban design plan is designed for mobility whether on foot or by vehicle. New York City government, in their efforts to solve the traffic problem especially in the business districts banned the use of private cars and encourages New Yorkers to use public transport. It is designed for mobility because of the existing major thoroughfares and pedestrian friendly parks and walks.
Many private institutions operate a formerly public domain. Most of the museums, galleries, opera houses and music halls are privately owned. New York City believes in the principle of inclusion. Inclusive cities like New York that people living in New York regardless of gender, race or creed should share the benefits of the city. They should have access to gain full participation in community development. Inclusion respects other cultures and encourages diversity. As characterized by the population living in New York, cultural diversity is welcomed. It is unavoidable though to have exclusive cultural enclaves like the China Town or the Hispanic quarter. They give New York the unique character and further emphasize inclusivity.
A global city, also known as a world city or world-class city, “is a city that has a direct and tangible effect on global affairs through socioeconomic, cultural, and/or political means.” (“Global City”) In recent years, the term has become increasingly familiar, because of the rise of globalization (i.e., global finance, communications, and travel).” (“Global City”) Saskia Sassen first mentioned the term “global city”, as opposed to megacity. Global cities share the same characteristics. These characteristics include: “familiarity of the city internationally; influential in world affairs; influential in the world economy; a fairly large population; advanced transportation and communication networks; attractive to foreign investors; and international cultural and athletic venues.”(“Global City”)
Saskia Sassen’s economic globalization theory linked the presence of the service sectors as the main drivers of a city’s global character. For Sassen, major service cities thus become “global cities,” the “strategic places” of economic globalization. As the locales for production, development, and marketing of advanced services, global cities are contemporary manifestations of Jacobs’ dynamic cities. This means that their success is not a matter of separate city development, rather they function as nodes in a worldwide network of cities (Taylor & Lang 3).
The context of globalization is dynamic that the definition evolves over time. As the world’s activities become interlocked, the term globalization takes on a different meaning. Short & Kim in Globalization and the City, wrote
“Globalization takes place in cities and cities embody and reflect globalization. Global processes lead to changes in the city and cities rework and situate globalization. Contemporary global dynamics are the spatial expression of globalization, while urban changes reshape and reform the processes of globalization” (9).
Criteria of a Global City according to Sassen and Abu-Lughod
Saskia Sassen underscored the effects of globalization in the economic milieu. Changes at various levels beginning at the local to the international level require that there must be a nodal point where everything will converge. World cities emerge to fulfill this function of coordinating global economic activities. The economic base of cities has evolved as a result of the demands for more products and services. Alternative service sectors are emerging as a consequence of globalization. “There is considerable evidence that a growing share of high-income jobs are going to city residents, more so in New York than in other major cities. This new middle class produced not only a physical upgrading of expanded portions of major cities, but also a reorganization of the consumption structure, both of which were particularly evident in the high-growth years of the 1980s.” (Sassen +32) Alternative economic base like the informal sector has developed to accommodate the new demands of expanding international market. Characteristic of this phenomenon is the increase in the number of immigrants that make up majority of the informal sector. New York City is a melting pot of multicultural convergence. There are more immigrants living in the city compared to the native population. Concurrent with this development is the increase in population and a marked drop in mortality rates in the city. There was a marked improvement in the quality of life as a result of new discoveries and new technologies. Migration is a consequence of globalization that carries with it economic, social and cultural implications. Information technology and modern transportation systems allow migrants to maintain links with their home countries (Sassen +32).
Saskia Sassen and others have further elaborated the “global city hypotheses.” “Global cities have acquired new functions beyond acting as centers of international trade and banking”. They have become:
- concentrated control locations in the world-economy that use advanced telecommunication facilities;
- important centers for finance and specialized producer service firms;
- coordinators of state power;
- sites of innovative post-Fordist forms of industrialization and production;
- markets for the products and innovations produced (Sassen 2001a, 2000, 1991; Brenner 1998; Yeoh 1999; Hall 1996; Friedmann 1995).(Chase-Dunn & Weeks)
For Sassen, the fundamental dynamic posited here is that the “more globalized the economy becomes, the higher the agglomeration of central functions in global cities. The extremely high densities evident in the downtown districts of these cities are the spatial expression of this logic.” (Sassen +32)
Janet Abu-Lughod also espoused the theory on class divergence. Because of increasing economic activity in a given city, the upper class has become dependent on the lower echelons for the much needed services. However, Abu-Lughod asserts that globalization goes beyond that. In the case of New York City, Abu-Lughod attributes such factors as “spatial/geographical concerns, diversity of immigrants and the relatively accepting attitude New York has toward them (although, it could be argued that immigration is directly related to globalization), and the New York region’s fragmented political structure to increasing class polarization.”(Stodola)
Abu-Lughod focuses her study on “eight forms of variation among the three cities” (Brenner 125-126):
- their changing structural positions in the world economy;
- the perpetual transformation of their physical sites through human activities;
- the impact of their original economic functions, political sponsorships and cultural patterns;
- the “cohort moment” at which each city experienced its most dramatic physical expansion;
- the transport technologies that molded each city’s built environment during its cohort moment;
- the rates, sources, and composition of demographic change over time;
- the changing social and technological organization of production and communication within each city; and
- the evolution of class relations, political institutions, and political cultures within each city (Brenner 125-126).
New York City : A Global City
Reflecting on the criteria presented by Sassen and Abu-Lughod, New York City is indeed a global city. Its rise and history portended the leading role the city will play in the future of world order. Sassen propounded that one of the indicators that a city is global is the presence of economic sub-sectors that developed as a consequence of the global role that New York City has assumed. The manufacturing and service sectors in particular were witness to the mass influx of immigrants seeking gainful employment and opportunities in the Big Apple. The reorganization of income-earning activities and emerging consumption and lifestyle patterns evident in New York City today ascertained the city’s position as the main global player in both the political and economic aspect.
The immigrants created new communities and “produced a low-cost equivalent of gentrification…The growing size and complexity of immigrant communities have generated a demand and supply for a wide range of goods, services, and workers.” (Sassen 32+) Sassen asserts that New York City, despite being part of the geographical composition of a developed country has the tendency to develop informal sectors that provide alternative and cheaper labor and services. Garment, furniture, construction, packaging and electronics industries are source of informal work for the immigrants (Sassen +32). As an example, the Fashion industry particularly needs low wage labor costs to compete with other countries that offer the same goods but using lower wage labor component. Reconstruction activities and transforming formerly dilapidated areas into first-class, high income yielding commercial and residential areas require the services of the informal sector. The massive increase in
“sub-contracting to small informal enterprises may be considered a by-product of the global restructuring of capital accumulation–the shift from Fordist to flexible regimes of capital accumulation–and the decline of a manufacturing dominated industrial complex in developed economies to a service-dominated economy serving dispersed manufacturing operations elsewhere” (Coombe 7).
In addition, this was the consequence of the inability of the formal sector to provide the services. This inadequacy may consist of “excessively high prices, inaccessible or difficult-to-reach locations of formal providers, or actual lack of provision. It would seem that this inadequacy of formal provision involves mostly low-income individuals or areas.” (Sassen 32+).
Abu-Lughod’s assertion that globalization is not limited to class divergence also holds true for New York City. Historically, New York City’s strategic geographical location contributed to its stature as a global city. New York was discovered by Italian Giovanni da Verrazano when he sailed into the New York Harbor. Hudson River, a major tributary also links the city to other parts of the country. Under the British rule, the struggle for independence resulted in a series of historic battles of the American Revolutionary War (“New York City”).
New York experienced the influx of immigrants even during its formative years. In an era known as the Gilded Age, poor immigrants multiplied as the city’s wealthiest prospered. The five boroughs also consolidated their administrations and economic systems (“New York City”). During the 1920s, New York became host to an influx of African-Americans as part of the Great Migration from the American South. During this period, the Harlem Renaissance bloomed and saw the city transformed with massive construction activities of skyscrapers. In 1925, New York became the most densely populated in the world surpassing London (“New York City”). The immigrant composition of the city’s population extends till the present times.
New York City has all the elements that Abu-Lughod outlined in her book regarding global cities. Major financial and political institutions are located in the city. The city also had its share of transformations in terms of technology, transportation and culture. In the current development paradigm of a Global City, New York City deserves being referred to as a global city. It has a rich history as well as the site of convergence of different cultures, business and political systems. New York City is synonymous to financial and political power. New York City has shown through the ages of the power it wielded and it has survived even the most tumultuous times.
Purpose of the Study
The study will compare two selected cities in the United States that had recently undergone urban renewal as a response to the changing times. To support the study, a review of existing related literature is conducted. Finally, the two cities are compared using acceptable urban planning theories as criteria.
Theoretical Framework
New Urbanism
New urbanism is an alternative urban development paradigm that departs from traditional automobile-oriented development favored in the last half century. Current developments both in the United States and Europe adopt new urbanism as a new urban redevelopment strategy. New urbanism is the response of many architects, planners and designers to the urban sprawl that continued to spread in most urban centers. The main principle of new urbanism is to restore the pedestrianization of communities while still maintaining traditional development principles of neighborhoods. New urbanism is also known as “neotraditional design, transit-oriented development, and traditional neighborhood development.” (Steuteville)
New urbanism applies modern design ideas while appropriately designating and converting spaces to become more functional. For example, residential areas have houses built with modern amenities. Shopping or commercial areas need to have adequate parking spaces but they need not be visible in the storefront. Adequate access to parking lots and transport nodes through pedestrianized paths and walkways eliminate congestion. New urbanism blends the new with the old. Instead of the standard grid type subdivisions of roads, new urbanism adopts a t-intersection to deflect traffic noise and create interest (Steuteville).
Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk included the following elements that constitute new urbanism development:
- Neighborhoods have a center. It could be open green space, a square or a busy intersection;
- Residential areas are within five-minute walk to the center or 2,000 feet away;
- Mixed dwelling types to accommodate different types of people;
- Shops and offices are located at the edges of the neighborhood;
- Schools are close by so that children can easily walk to and from their homes;
- Play areas should be accessible – not more than 0.10 mile away;
- Streets within the neighborhood are networked to disperse traffic through a variety of vehicular and pedestrian routes;
- Trees line and shade the narrow streets creating an environment suitable for pedestrians and bikers;
- Buildings are placed near the streets;
- Parking lots and garages are placed in the back and usually accessed through alleys;
- Prominent sites are reserved for civic buildings;
- The neighborhood is organized, autonomous and secure (Steuteville)
Kevin Lynch’s Mental Map of the City
Kevin Lynch proposed an innovative way of viewing the city. By creating mental maps, the city becomes legible. With the mental map, different elements of the city become distinct and people are able to identify and appreciate them. To examine the two localities in the study, Lynch’s principal elements of the city are used to create a mental map of the city. The following are the five principal elements of Lynch’s model and their definitions:
- Paths – are routes where people can move around the city. All other elements of the city are arranged around paths.
- Edges – define the boundaries of different zones within the city. They serve as lateral references of the people living in the city.
- Nodes – are junctions or meeting points. They can be intersections between paths and edges.
- Areas or Districts – are identifiable elements of the city. Districts may be distinguished according to its functionality like residential, business or industrial.
- Landmarks – are unique features of a city. They are also important in providing directions when one moves within the city. They possess unique qualities that make them distinct from other elements of the city (Sundilson).
Definition of Terms
Global city. Also known as “a world city or world-class city, is a city that has a direct and tangible effect on global affairs through socioeconomic, cultural, and/or political means. In recent years, the term has become increasingly familiar, because of the rise of globalization (i.e., global finance, communications, and travel).” (“Global City”)
New urbanism is an alternative urban development paradigm that departs from traditional automobile-oriented development favored in the last half century (Steuteville).
Urban Fringe. Hough decribed “fringe as a battlefield between rural activities (predestined to disappear) and the constantly expanding city, with only placelessness in between. The fringe is thus characterized simply as a graveyard for the countryside and a cradle for the city, whereas the intermediate phases of landscape and life are being ignored.” (cited in Qviström 270)
Urban land. Defined as that parcel of land allocated specifically for urban activities (Qadeer 169).
Urban Sprawl. “Is the increased use of urbanized land by fewer people than in the past.” (“Land Use and Urban Sprawl”)
Limitations of the Study
The scope of the research covers urban development studies on two selected cities. Most will be based on existing literature. Due to time and resource constraints, the research will use existing documentations to substantiate the comparison and evaluation of the two cities. The researcher will utilize publications from scholarly journals and books to derive the information. The researcher, however, cannot validate if the resources were still applicable to present day settings. Due to limited information available on the topic, most of the researches were culled from journals and books.
The researcher consulted several journals and publications under the subject of urban planning, urban development, new urbanism, and urban development problems in both University and online libraries like Questia. Several journals and feature stories were also consulted from both print and online versions. For the database search engines of EBSCO, ProQuest, Blackwell-Synergy, MetaPress, Gale, Wiley and Sage online publications, the following keywords were used to obtain the relevant documents: urban development, urban sprawl, urban problems, new urbanism, urban fringe and urban planning. Other online sources using the Google search engine and providing the same set of keywords.
Review of Related Literature
M.A. Qadeer in The Nature of Urban Land defined urban land as that parcel of land allocated specifically for urban activities (169). He characterizes an urban land with the following attributes: Location refers to the position of the parcel land in relation to other areas that are supportive of economic and social activities. The area is linked to other peripheral areas through roads, paths and utility lines (170). Space is another attribute of urban land but not all are exclusively set firmly on the ground. Space, in the context of urban land means that any parcel of land that is man-made as much as it is part of the natural environment (171). Property means that some form of ownership exists whether public or private (171). Clustering refers to the aspect of urban development where no property stands on its own. Each parcel of urban land is contiguous. The characteristic of urban land is heterogeneous. Immobility or indestructibility defined the physical attributes of urban land. It is obvious that the built environment is difficult to transport or move (173).
Amin & Graham in The Ordinary City underscored the growing importance of cities in the global milieu. They assert that cities are “key creative, control and cultural centres within globalizing economic, cultural and social dynamics.” (411) Cities and urban centers are engines of economic progress because it is where most economic activities take place. The importance of cities as economic centers was argued along two streams: “the idea of the city as a knowledge-base and the debate surrounding the supposed resurgence of agglomeration economies, especially in industries of flexible specialization and volatile demand.” (415)
Along the various streams of urban redevelopment initiatives, the authors also found central ideas that provide guidance to new urbanism movements. The new perspective on urban renewal stresses on “the primacy of certain social, cultural, economic, physical, environmental or institutional dynamics within contemporary urban life.” (416) New urbanism offers an alternative approach to urban development where the community is viewed in a holistic paradigm. However, new urbanism theory also has its challenges. There is always the danger of “overgeneralizing” and “overemphasis” on certain aspects of the theory. Not all urban spaces needing renewal and redevelopment could adhere to the principles of urbanism (416). The lack of apparent interconnectivity and interrelationship among the new urban spaces rendered them into “splintering and fragmenting into cellular zones, extended over larger regions, and geared towards specific uses whilst excluding others.” (417)
When analyzing urban areas, Paul Claval in The Nature of Cities and the Analysis of Their Cultural Problems saw the need for geographers and urban planners to examine the cultural context of urban areas. Space as an ecological environment supports transportation and communication as well as the activities like work and leisure that make the urban areas pulse with life. On the legal aspect, space delineated the public from the private. Urban areas are inadvertently linked to people’s past because people who use and live in these urban spaces place distinct meanings on them (159). Urban landscapes are not merely plots of land but an integral element of the myriad of systems that keeps the urban areas functional. Urban landscapes are made up of “roads, gardens, parks, one-storey suburban family houses, sky-scrapers, extensive commercial or industrial buildings.” (159) Urban areas offer an environment for cultural formations for those who inhabit or visit them. Urban areas offer “many opportunities for encounters, the availability of a wide variety of information, man-made landscapes with many monuments and other landmarks.” (160) Not all people living in urban areas have the same cultural formations and perspectives. Hence, there is a high probability of integration. However, problems are encountered when integration is unsuccessful. Coexistence of different cultures within the urban environment posed challenges due to high density and the necessity to share areas or territories (161).
In The State of the Cities, a report published by U.S. Housing and Urban Development in 1999, observed that a strong economy benefits cities and allow them to recover. However, in recent years, the problem associated with urban areas had spilled over to older suburbs. These areas were manifesting problems that are unique to urban settlements like job loss, population decline, crime, and disinvestments (1). In addition, other areas were experiencing the adverse effects of urban sprawl that translated to “traffic congestion, overcrowded schools, loss of open spaces, and other sprawl-related problems as well as a lack of affordable housing.” (1). Despite a robust economy, many cities lagged behind and continued to experience “population decline, loss of middle-class families, slow job growth, income inequality, and poverty.”(2) Unemployment rate remained high in one in every six central cities. The unemployment rate registered as high as 50% of the national average (2). Poverty rates were at 20 per cent or higher in 170 small and medium sized cities while 30 other cities’ poverty rates were at 30 per cent or higher (2).
Anthony Downs in Some Realities About Sprawl and Urban Decline described the problems associated with urban sprawl. Urban sprawl contributes to two contiguous problems namely economic and social. The first, economic problems often occurred in areas with rapid growth and also spread to neighboring areas. The problem includes
…traffic congestion, air pollution, large-scale absorption of open space, extensive use of energy for movement, inability to provide adequate infrastructures, inability to locate region-serving facilities that produce negative local impacts (such as airports), shortages of affordable housing near where new jobs are being created, and suburban labor shortages (2).
The second, social problems often occurred in bigger cities, inner ring suburbs and a few outer ring suburbs because developments had been concentrated on the poorer sectors of the city. Those sites in turn became breeding grounds for crime, poor education quality, non-performing resources and dysfunctional bureaucracies (3). When addressing the two problems, the first received most attention because it generally affected the wealthier segments of the population. The second received minimal attention because it affected poorer households.
Urban development has spilled onto the rural landscape for several reasons. Mark S. Henry, et al in Extending Carlino-Mills Models to Examine Urban Size and Growth Impacts on Proximate Rural Areas, wrote that the changing dynamics between urban and rural were consequences of increasing land rents and more people are moving into the rural areas because of congestion. The positive impacts on urban fringes are the expected increase in employment opportunities as well as opening new markets. Major companies are also responsible for the increase of distribution and services in the rural areas (527).
Another phenomenon was the increase in competition between urban and rural areas because of production for external markets. The areas compete for job opportunities. Urban areas may offer wide range of economic benefits but increasing congestion limits their growth. Rural areas, on the other hand offer cheaper labor and real estate but other costs like transportation and moving goods to market prove to be disadvantageous (527). The authors’ concluded that urban growth has an impact on nearby rural areas particularly in employment and population change. Their findings in the United States’ South Carolina and border areas of Georgia and North Carolina revealed that jobs are moving away from older urban centers into rural municipalities as people commute from rural areas to the urban fringes. Rural municipalities nearest to urban centers experienced unprecedented population growth (540-541).
Cunningham, et al in their study Faces of Suburbanization: Residential Location Choice at the Urban Fringe, observed that the gradual infringement of the urban into the rural posed additional challenges to rural communities. The incessant rapid development of urban areas that had encroached into rural areas carry with it problems like “loss of open space, increased concerns about water quality, and social pressures such as rising enrollments in local schools.” (395). The authors also noted that most people who relocate to the fringe locations are wealthier compared to those who relocate to urban centers. Minorities, older people and the disabled, in particular, are more like to relocate in urban centers (395).
Rapid urbanization has put much pressure on the quality of urban air, water and life. While these challenges continue to plague highly urbanized centers, Jennifer Wolch in Green Urban Worlds underscored the need to find way to improve the situation. Three main challenges face urban communities. First, the communities must consider how to recover lost elements of natural habitat like plants and animals and bring them back into the community; Second, the practice of consumption and production should undergo change; Finally, the promotion of “ecological citizenship” to gain economic and social justice for the present and future generations (380).
Urban planning and urban problem solving strategies are linked to politics and organizational and institutional structures. To negotiate, plan and implement strategies for change, individuals or groups must understand the processes and relationships with the state and civil society. Sarah Elwood in Beyond Cooptation or Resistance: Urban Spatial Politics, Community Organizations, and GIS-Based Spatial Narratives emphasized the importance of “spatial analysis technologies and different types of spatial knowledge” in negotiating for change (324). Spatial knowledge refers to the extent of meaning and characteristics of an area that individuals or groups often attached to a place (324). Spatial knowledge is particularly important because of the power dynamic involved when determining the goals and direction for change within a community (324-325). Negotiating for urban change essentially involved spatial politics. Institutional politics are also present when individuals or group negotiate for change in their community. Institutional politics are often defined by the extent of “bureaucratic structures, such as positions on a planning board formally allocated to elected officials or community organization representatives.”(325) Urban planning, problem solving and service delivery had undergone changes and relationship among the actors became more complicated. The author suggested the use of GIS to make spatial narrative more flexible. In her opinion, using GIS as a strategic tool defining spatial politics “urban planning and revitalization is best read not as an expansion or contraction of community organizations’ agency and authority, but as a reconstitution of their engagement in spatial, institutional, and knowledge politics.” (337)
Methodology
To frame the study in the right perspective, a documentary survey on second hand information will be conducted to glean a more holistic approach towards the study. The documentary survey is important so that the study is grounded and supported by previous researches. The previous researches can also be used to validate the current study. A review of related literature and research is included in the initiative. This would give the study a firm foundation and it gives the researcher an idea what previous research initiatives on the topic had been made.
A documentary search was also conducted from online sources using the keywords: urban development, urban sprawl, urban problems, new urbanism, urban fringe and urban planning. The results yielded several important scholarly works relevant to the study. The study proposed to use two theoretical frameworks to ground the work. The intention of this study is to compare two selected cities using the concept of new urbanism and Kevin Lynch’s five elements of the mental map of the city. Finally, the two cities are compared using acceptable urban planning theories as criteria.
Findings and Results
Two cities transitioning from rural into urban spaces are compared using two urban planning theories as criteria. The first in consideration is Addison, Texas. The other is the new development in Phoenix, Arizona. Both cities underwent urban renewal in order to address the challenges brought by urban sprawl. The two areas are essentially “edge cities” or “urban fringes” that need to reinvent themselves to accommodate growing needs. These cities are not highly urbanized yet they accommodate some of the elements that characterize urban centers with a difference. Each case study met and resolved the challenges of instituting change.
Addison, Texas
Addison, Texas is located about 14 miles from Dallas and is typically described an “edge city” bounded by freeways and collector roads. The freeway access to North Dallas Tollway connected Addison to major highways in the Dallas Metroplex development (Local Government Commission). Part of Addison had been converted into urban centers with pedestrianized pathways and commercial spaces. Parking spaces are surreptitiously hidden behind each storefront thereby providing each building with unobstructed view of landscaped areas (Barnett 10+). A key component in the Addison development was the five-storey elevator apartment building integrated into streetfront commercial establishments and parking garages mimicking the characteristics of an urban city. RTKL was the urban designer for the new development. Addison considered itself in the prime position as an edge city of Dallas. The city of Addison shouldered the cost of the new development (Barnett 10+)
Addison supports a population of about 15,000 with a land area of 4.5 square miles. In addition, it is the largest center for retail activity in Dallas employing about 160,000 people or 14 percent of the total jobs in Dallas (Local Government Commission). Corollary to the urban development are 3,000 residential units built to complement the new city. New zoning classifications were implemented to accommodate the new development. To ensure that the new developed areas remained pedestrianized and free from the typical vehicular chaos characteristic of urban centers, Addison Circle had two distinct subzones. One, a residential neighborhood, comprising of medium rise housing, retail stores, parks and community service and the other the commercial district fronting the North Dallas Tollway consisting of high-density office, hotel, retail and residential development (Local Government Commission).
One of the features of the new urban design was the implementation of 12 feet deep residential streets and 14 feet on boulevards complemented with sidewalks and pocket parks. The tree-lined narrow streets provide a relaxing environment for a bustling city. More than 30 percent of the area is dedicated to parks and public spaces. The new residential densities for housing are 37.5 units/acre while apartment densities was at 90 units/acre (Local Government Commission). Residential buildings are designed four-storeys high surrounding semi-private courtyards. Units can range from 570 square feet to 3,200 square feet (Local Government Commission). Figure 1 shows the site development plan of Addison (See Appendix 1). New urbanism principles are adhered to by the new development. The city is successful on creating an urban area yet its characteristics depart from the traditional definition of urban centers. This is the city’s response to the growing need of transitioning from a rural enclave into a more robust urban center.
City of Maricopa, Phoenix, Arizona
The City of Maricopa has similar characteristics. It is 16 miles south of Interstate 10. It supports a population of 15,935 in 2005 (Arizona Department of Commerce). The Interstate 8 (18 miles south) and abd I-10 (16 miles north) are accessible through Sate Route 347 which traverses through downtown Maricopa. Formerly an agriculture-based economy, today’s residents are employed in non-farming industries like “Harrah’s Ak-Chin Casino or commute to their places of employment in nearby Casa Grande or Phoenix.” (The Maricopa General Plan 1) The vision of the city for its future is to retain its small town attributes while acknowledging the need for modernization and upgrade. Within the city limits, land use criteria were amended to accommodate a projected growth of 190,000 in 2020. Table 1 shows how land use designations and sizes were amended (See Appendix II).
Maricopa City is essentially an agricultural service center which includes “USDA/University of Arizona Research Center” and rapidly developing residential areas since 2000 (The Maricopa General Plan 16). Current land use supports an expanding suburban community with complementary service core of businesses and industries (16). Along the Maricopa-Casa Grande/Union Pacific Railway corridors are existing facilities that transport cattle feeds. However, increasing land value has prompted the city to consider transferring the cattle feeds depot (16). The Union Pacific mainline creates a distinctive “edge” but access to the utility remained a challenge for the community. The main artery is John Wayne Parkway that bisects the north-south spine of the city. The land allocation is mainly agricultural at 51%, followed by medium density residential developments at 21%, open and vacant areas comprised of 12% of the total area of the city (17). Employment land uses are primarily concentrated in the “Maricopa-Casa Grande Highway/Union Pacific corridor, the SR 238 corridor, the Phoenix Regional Airport area, and at several nodes in the southern portions of the planning area.” (19) Primarily residential areas are mostly confined in the “east and south of the Old Town area, [including] west of John Wayne Parkway.” (19)
Majority of the trips to and from Maricopa are via automobiles or the railways. Pedestrian and bike lanes are absent. Connectivity between different community destinations proved to be challenging. Only the Old Town area has reserved pedestrian areas. From an agricultural economy, the city of Maricopa has transitioned into service and construction business. To date, the community is underserved badly needing services like retail services and medical facilities (44).
An inventory of existing open spaces and parks only yielded two major ones: Rotary Park (1.25 acres) and the future city park (18.8 acres). The current ratio of open space to population is at 1.66 acres open space for every 1000 population. Quite low compared to the national standard of 5.5 to 6.0 acres for every 1000 (51).
Current status of community facilities is varied and may not be able to support increasing population. The main community facilities of the city include City Hall facility, the Library, and a Public Works yard (61). There are plans to undertake substantial redevelopment in the city to accommodate future requirements.
Maricopa is generally an old rural community thrust into transforming into an urban area because of the effects of urban sprawl from nearby cities. The city has plans to upgrade and conform to standard of an urban city but wants to maintain its “old town” feel.
Analysis of the Two Cities using Kevin Lynch’s Mental Maps of the City
Comparing the two cities, Addison appeared to be well planned with appropriately designated elements of a city. (See Figure 2 – Appendix 1) However, Maricopa City needs to make improvements in order to respond to growing needs. In the current situation, it was difficult to point out the important landmarks that connect the city to the outside communities. The development in Maricopa is mixed and disjointed. (See Figure 3– Appendix 1) The commercial areas are scattered (in red) while residential developments sprouted in the most unlikeliest places. The community needs to add more paths so that movement to and from the city would be less challenging. Presently, the main node is the John Wayne Parkway which bisected the city.
Maricopa is an example of a rural community unprepared for the onslaught of urban sprawl. Although major transportation routes and utilities are in place, they need to connect the city to the outer communities so that commerce and business transactions will run smoothly. Maricopa can learn from the strategies used by Addison in developing their city. Inclusion of pedestrian pathways and bicycle lanes can connect the city to its outer limits. Presently, the only way to and from the city is through automobiles. It would be disadvantageous for the former rural community because it would be difficult to maintain the ‘old town’ feel they envisioned in the future.
The Old Town could be developed into a major node and landmark for its historical value for the community. Comparing the plan of the two cities, Addison adopted a grid plan where it is easier to manage. Maricopa city has only one major access into the community. This needs to be reconsidered because it might cause vehicular congestion.
Conclusion
Addison is a well-planned community worth emulating while Maricopa is unprepared to receive additional pressure from more economic and industrial development. Maricopa is typical of many rural communities turned urban centers as a consequence of urban sprawl. Although the city has plans to amend the current situation, they may be too late because urbanization and progress waits for no one.
New urbanism offers an alternative approach to urban development where the community is viewed in a holistic paradigm. New urbanism may offer positive developments but Addison must remember not to “overgeneralize” and “overemphasize” on certain aspects of the theory. Not all urban spaces needing renewal and redevelopment could adhere to the principles of urbanism (Amin & Graham 416).
Cited Works
Amin, Ash & Graham, Stephen, “The Ordinary City,” Trans Inst Br Geogr NS (22) (1997), 411–429.
Arizona Department of Commerce, “Maricopa Community Profile,” azacreage.com 2007.
Banerjee, T. “The Future of Public Space: Beyond Invented Streets and Reinvented Places,” Journal of American Planning Association, 67(1)(2001), 1+.
Barnett, Jonathan, “Turning Edge Cities into Real Cities: Edge Cities in Texas, Virginia, Florida, and Elsewhere Are Becoming Real Cities. Streets Have Sidewalks, and They Define Blocks, Squares, and Courtyards. Parking Is Tucked Away in Garages. Buildings House Multiple Uses,” Planning. 68(11)(2002),10+.
Breault, D. A., “The Fall of the Academic,” coe.ilstu.edu 2007.
Brenner, Neil, “World City Theory, Globalization and the Comparative Historical Method,” Urban Affairs Review (2001).
Chase-Dunn, Christopher & John Weeks, “Measuring the Suburbanization of World Cities,” irows.ucr.edu 2007.
Claval, Paul, “The Nature of Cities and the Analysis of Their Cultural Problems,” Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie , 98(2)(2007),153–164.
Congress for the New Urbanism, “Addison Circle,” cnu.org 2007.
Coombe, R.,“The Cultural Life of Things: Anthropological Approaches to Law and Society in Conditions of Globalization,” The American University Journal of International Law and Policy (1995).
Cunningham, Caroline, et al. “Faces of Suburbanization: Residential Location Choice at the Urban Fringe,” Review of Agricultural Economics, 29(3)(2007), 390–395.
Downs, Anthony, “Some Realities About Sprawl and Urban Decline,” The Brookings Institution (1999)
Elwood, Sarah, “Beyond Cooptation or Resistance: Urban Spatial Politics, Community Organizations, and GIS-Based Spatial Narratives,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 96(2)(2006), 323–341.
“Global City,” wikipedia.org Web
Henry, Mark S., et al, “Extending Carlino-Mills Models to Examine Urban Size and Growth Impacts on Proximate Rural Areas,” Growth and Change, 30(I999), 526-548.
Kimball, R., “Academic Psychobabble, or Richard Sennett goes to town,” The New Criterion, 9(9)(1991)
“Land Use and Urban Sprawl,” cwac.net 2007.
Local Government Commission, “Addison Circle: Addison, TX,” lgc.org 2007
“New York City,” wikipedia.org 2007. Web.
Qadeer, M.A., “The Nature of Urban Land,”American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 40(2)(1981), 167-182.
Qviström, Mattias, “Landscapes out of order: studying the inner urban fringe beyond the rural – urban divide,” Geogr. Ann., 89 B(3)(2007), 269–282.
RTKL Associates, Inc., “Addison Circle Sustainable Development,” developmentexcellence.com 2007
Sassen, Saskia, “Rebuilding the Global City: Economy, Ethnicity and Space,” Social Justice. 20(3-4)(1993), 32+.
Short, J.R. and Y-H Kim, Globalization and the City. London: Longman. 1999
Steuteville, Robert, “The New Urbanism: An alternative to modern, automobile-oriented planning and development,” newurbannews.com 2007
Stodola, Sarah, “Globalization and Class Division in American Cities,” methree.net 2007
Sundilson, Ethan, “Kevin Lynch: City Elements Create Images in Our Mind, 1960,” csiss.org 2007
Taylor, P. and Lang, R., “U.S. Cities in the “World City Network” Metropolitan Policy Program Brookings Institution (2005).
“The Maricopa General Plan,” azacreage.com 2007
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, “The State of the Cities,” (1999) huduser.org 2007
Wolch, Jennifer, “Green Urban Worlds,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 97(2)(2007), 373–384
Appendix I
Appendix II
