Smart Growth: Threat to the Quality of Life. Experience

Transcription

1 Smart Growth: Threat to the Quality of Life Presentation by Wendell Cox Wendell Cox Consultancy Visiting Professor Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers Paris Frontier Centre for Public Policy Winnipeg 24 February 2004 Experience 1

2 Smart Growth: Threat to the Quality of Life OUTLINE 1. Smart Growth: A Primer 2. Rental Car Tour of Europe 3. Portland: False Nirvana 4. The Role of Home Ownership 5. Mass Transit 6. Winnipeg Observations 7. Growth Inducing Strategies 1. Smart Growth: A Primer 2

3 What is Smart Growth THE ANTI-SPRAWL MOVEMENT APOCOLYPTIC VIEW Threat of farmland loss Waste of land Loss of community Excessive public costs SOLUTION The Compact City (Higher density) Get people out of cars REALITY Canadians & Americans Happiest in World: Pew Lone Mountain Compact absent a material threat to other individuals or the community, people should be allowed to live and work where and how they like. 3

4 Farmland: 30x-100x Urbanization Canada: % 200% Agricultural Productivity Production 150% 100% Agricultural 97% Urban 3% Manitoba: % Land 0% Agricultural 99% Urban 1% Statistics Canada: ,000 Farmland Reduction ¼ Urbanization 120, , ,300 80,000 60,000 40,000 20, ,000 Urban Land Farmland Reduction 4

5 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Higher Density: More Congestion MORE INTENSE AIR POLLUTION Vehicle Hours/ Square Mile US W. Europe Asia NOx CO NMHC Air Pollution MPH Higher Density = Longer Commutes Work Trip Travel Time US Paris Hong Kong Tokyo 5

6 Larger Urban Areas More Dense URBAN LAND AREA BY POPULATION QUINTILE: % 4 th Population Quintile 15% 3 rd Population Quintile 11% 6% 2 nd Quintile Montreal & Vancouver 1 st Quintile Toronto % of Total Urban Land Area 5 th Population Quintile 48% Newer, Lower Density: Less Spending $1,400 $1,200 >700 USA Municipalities Spending/Capita: 2000 $1,000 $800 $600 $400 $200 Density 9,067 Density 5,466 Density 2,861 Density 2,218 $0 Core (1939) Ring 1: 1959 Ring 2: 1979 Ring 3: Later 6

7 Spending Less in Smaller Cities $1,400 $1,200 >700 USA Municipalities Spending/Capita: 2000 $1,000 $800 $600 $400 $200 Population 274,000 Population 71,000 Population 38,000 Population 22,000 Population 9,000 $0 Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5 Myth: Jobs-Housing Balance Other Location 17.9% Neighborhood 25.9% Job Location 17.9% Other Reasons 17.7% Hong Kong >1,000,000 of Jobs Passed House 20.5% Reason for Neighborhood Choice 7

8 Obesity & Land Use: The Myth Caloric Intake Trend: Early 1990s 1,774 2,002 Obesity Food Consumption Up Land Use Little Changed Urban Density Europe from a Rental Car 8

9 Paris from a Rental Car Suburban Hanover Suburban Copenhagen Suburban Antwerp Paris suburbs Suburban Commercial Development Stockholm Big Box Home Store Stockholm: Arlanda Corridor Strip Development: Paris Copenhagen suburbs 9

10 Urban Land Area Expansion Paris Urban Area Sprawl is caused by affluence and population growth, and which of these, exactly, do we propose to prohibit? Greg Easterbrook in The New Republic Planners View: North America? 10

11 3. Portland: False Nirvana Urban Growth Boundaries & Other Land Rationing Rationing Raises Prices 11

12 (Land) Rationing Raises Prices United States Portland HOUSING OPPORTUNITY INDEX Portland Retreats on Densification 300,000 Developed Acres Plan 250, , Plan Actual 2002 More 2004? 150, ,000 50,000 0 Other Smart Growth Climbdowns Maryland Portland New Jersey Vote Minneapolis-St. Paul Against Density Suburban Washington 12

13 4. The Role of Home Ownership 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Purpose of Economic System? % OF NET WORTH IN HOME EQUITY BY INCOME 65% <$20K Widely Distributed Wealth Creation 43% 41% 34% 32% $20-40K $40-50K $50-60K $60-70K 29% 33% 29% $70-80K US Households: 1998 $80-90K $90-100K 16% $100K+ 13

14 Home Ownership & Sprawl: US 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 49.1% 59.2% 65.7% 74.7% 30% 20% 10% 0% Core 1,002 Municipalities st Ring Suburbs 2nd Ring Suburbs 3rd Ring Suburbs Illegal in Portland HOUSING OPPORTUNITY IN ATLANTA Atlanta Suburbs Growth: 1990s White Non-Hispanic 32% Visible Minorities 68% 14

15 Black Home Ownership Higher in Sprawl 60% Kahn (Tufts 50% University) Home Ownership Rate 55.0% 40% 45.0% 30% 20% 10% 0% Less Sprawl More Sprawl Tomás Rivera Policy Institute: Land Rationing Growth Controls Impact Fees Barriers: Hispanic Home Ownership Affordability Driven by Land Regulation high prices have little to do with a free market for land. Instead, our evidence suggests that zoning and other land use controls play the dominant role in making housing expensive. PRICE ESCALATING DYNAMICS Land prices rise Infill costs more Less competition Builders move up-market 15

16 5. Mass Transit Transit 55% Highways 97% Transit 3% Highways & Other 45% Winnipeg Transit Share > Portland 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 14% Winnipeg 7% Portland 16

17 Why Are All These Drivers Not on the Train? Picture from Alternative Master Transportation Plan for the City of Toronto Auto- Competitive Transit in Portland Transit (Lines) Auto (Green Area) 30 Minute Travel Access From Suburban Location Auto access far greater than transit 17

18 Urban Area Auto Competitive Transit Would Require Dismantling Suburbs Ceaucescu: Father of Smart Growth TRANSIT IS DOING ALL IT CAN 6. Winnipeg Observations 18

19 Winnipeg More Dense than Portland 1,600 1,400 1,200 1, ,407 Winnipeg Population per Square KM 1,209 Portland Winnipeg & & Portland: Density Density Profile 6,000 5,000 4,000 Winnipeg Population per Square KM by Land Area Decile (10%): 2001 & 2000: Census Tracts > 400/KM2 3,000 2,000 1,000 Portland 0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 19

20 Metropolitan Population: Metropolitan Population: % 500% WINNIPEG DROPS FROM 4 TH TO 8 TH Calgary 400% 300% 200% 100% Edmonton Toronto Ottawa-Hull Vancouver London Quebec Hamilton Montreal Winnipeg 0% Education Taxes Crime Services Making Winnipeg a Better City 20

21 7. Growth & Income Inducing Policies SERVING PEOPLE NOT PLANNING IDEOLOGY 65% 43% 41% 34% 32% 29% 33% 29% 16% Lone Mountain Compact absent a material threat to other individuals or the community, people should be allowed to live and work where and how they like. 21

22 The Universal Dream: People First Honjo (Tokyo suburb) People First Not Bricks, Mortar or Urban Form Wendell Cox Consultancy publicpurpose.com demographia.com 22