Sie sind auf Seite 1von 20

Community Development and Smart Growth:

Translation Paper Stopping Sprawl at its Source


Number Thirteen

Community Development and Smart Growth:


Stopping Sprawl at its Source
This paper was jointly commissioned by the Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and
Livable Communities* and the Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC).** The col-
laborating author on this paper was Tony Proscio1. This is the thirteenth in a series
of translation papers published by the Funders’ Network to translate the impact of
sprawl and urban disinvestment upon issues of importance to our communities and
environment and to suggest opportunities for progress that would be created by
smarter growth policies and practices. Other issues addressed in the series of trans-
lation papers include the arts, health, biodiversity, children and families, education,
aging, transportation, agriculture, civic engagement, parks and open space, work-
force development, and social equity.

Abstract
The tenets of smart growth have ment projects
more in common with those of com- that have taken
*
The Funders’ Network works to munity development than adherents shape in expli-
strengthen and expand funders’ of either movement appreciate. Seen citly “smart”
abilities to support organizations through narrow lenses, the two fields deliberations
working to build more livable appear to involve different economic with regional
communities through smarter
growth policies and practices. For and social dynamics, taking place in authorities and
more information, visit different locations: rampant, helter- planners. None
www.fundersnetwork.org. skelter development in suburbia, vs. of these exam-
concentrated poverty and underin- ples arose as a
**
LISC is a national nonprofit vestment in inner cities. But this result of some
intermediary that works with article begins with the argument that intentional
CDCs and their governmental those two dynamics are related, and good-govern-
and private sector partners to
revitalize distressed communi- in fact are best addressed in tandem, ment exercise
ties. Through its 38 local offices not separately. It describes some rea- aimed at aligning the theories of
and a national rural program, sons why the community develop- urban and suburban development.
LISC has provided to CDCs over ment and smart growth movements On the contrary, all arose because
$4 billion in project financing have tended to diverge, and how they solved a concrete local problem
and grants, as well as business they might come together around a that had regional implications, and
expertise, enabling those groups
to address all aspects of building more effective, common vision. because neighborhood and metro-
stronger, better communities. politan leaders were wise enough to
For more information, visit The bulk of this paper describes recognize those implications and
www.liscnet.org. examples of community develop- come up with common solutions.

© Copyright 2003 by the Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities and the Local Initiatives Support Corporation
Page 2

The paper argues, in essence, that need to be more carefully studied


the intersection of community and replicated. The ideas behind
development and smart growth is them need more interdisciplinary
today more a matter of practical attention from scholars and policy
reality than of well-developed theo- experts. And the combined topic
ry. And even the reality is mostly generally needs more leadership,
sporadic, scattered, and poorly communication, and advocacy than
understood. For the two fields to it has received so far. The paper
come together in an effective ends with suggestions on how fun-
alliance that is genuinely widespread ders can accelerate progress in all
and nationally significant, the these areas, to the benefit of both
episodes of successful collaboration movements.

Introduction
The national movements that we David Rusk calls an “inside game.”2
now associate with community devel- Its first goals were akin to disaster
opment and smart growth got their recovery — to organize and revivify
start in different decades, addressed communities that had been partially
different problems (at least at first), demolished, nearly depopulated, and
and mobilized different groups of economically devastated, and in con-
supporters when they were launched. sequence had grown defensive and
They grew up, for a time, seeming weary. The first challenge for com-
mostly unconnected — except for an munity development was to stanch a
almost coincidental proximity in the hemorrhage of residents, capital, and
same metropolitan regions, with political will. And for that reason it
community developers operating started small and local, focusing
mostly at the core and the anti- inward on the rebuilding of its own
sprawl forces concentrated mainly at back yard.
the city limits and beyond.
Smart growth, by contrast, started as
Community development began as a a reaction to abundance and rapid
reaction to scarcity and market con- expansion. It grew up among rural
traction. It arose as an aftershock of and suburban dwellers, regional and
the massive federal urban programs state planners, and environmentalists
of the 1950s and ’60s, of which city — people who, in Rusk’s phrase, had
dwellers were often the targets but long since learned to play the “out-
too rarely the beneficiaries. It grew as side” game of regional, state, and fed-
inner-city markets failed and invest- eral coalition-building.3 Its galvaniz-
ment fled, leaving neighborhoods ing forces were in some ways the
with only a fraction of the popula- mirror image of those in the inner
tion and capital needed to sustain city. Smart growth concerns had to
them. Community development do not with feelings of powerlessness
therefore began as what historian and disfranchisement, but with
Page 3

a desire to knit together constituen- by now decades old, sometimes


cies with related bases of power. Its blurred beyond recognition, and More and more
goals necessarily comprehended mul- increasingly counterproductive. More (though sometimes
tiple interests spread across a wide and more (though sometimes with- without anyone
territory. While community develop- out anyone realizing it), the banners realizing it), the
ers were organizing and building of smart growth and community
banners of
their own blocks, smart growth development fly over the same
advocates were reaching out to dis- armies, fighting the same battles for smart growth
parate jurisdictions, terrains, and the same ends. As often happens and community
demographic groups. On the surface, even in more literal battles, their development fly
the two strategies thus looked radi- commanders aren’t always communi- over the same
cally different, and seemed headed in cating with one another, and the evel
different directions. of trust and mutual respect may vary
armies, fighting
from battalion to battalion. Yet few the same battles
But those differences, which were would argue that such divisions are for the same ends.
never much more than tactical, are wise or helpful.

A Harmony of Purpose

Sprawl, the underlying cause of development of new locales, poorly


most non-smart growth, is a result connected with other parts of the
of many forces, including some mar- social and economic landscape, is
ket preferences for things that are not the result of a deliberate con-
uniquely suburban and rural: big sumer choice for inefficient growth.
lots, natural amenities, small juridic- It happened partly because of the
tions, economic or ethnic homo- speed of population movements,
geneity. A purely urban policy — outpacing the ability of governments
Rusk’s “inside game” — has little to recognize or prepare for them.
answer to these phenomena, since Some of that rush, in turn, was an
cities can’t manufacture those assets outgrowth of desperate population
in sufficient quantity to cater to so flight — away from more efficient
great a demand. but poorly maintained neighbor-
hoods, and into alternatives that
But the ill effects of sprawl are not were not always carefully planned or
solely a side-effect of changing mar- well coordinated with other aspects
ket preferences. Some of the worst of regional development.
aspects of sprawl — including much
of the harm it does to the environ- Preserving or rebuilding older, core
ment and to the effective delivery of communities is therefore one essen-
public services — come from the tial strategy for bringing reason and
wasteful, hasty depopulation of order to the development of whole
older places that could have held metropolitan areas. Redevelopment
their residents’ loyalty, but instead of these areas isn’t the sole answer
were left to crumble. Scatter-shot to sprawl, but it is an indispensable
Page 4

part of the answer. Virtually every development as necessary. For exam-


sprawling metropolitan area in the ple, in a recent report by Grow
United States has centers of outward Smart Rhode Island, the statewide
flight at or near its core — popula- leadership group for regional plan-
tion centrifuges that disperse resi- ning, the first of four “policy direc-
dents outward as if by irresistible tions” recommended for the state’s
force. So long as such communities future is this:
continue to lose the confidence of
their residents, the ruin will spread, Let’s commit as a state to
with each successive wave of deterio- actively promote reuse of the
ration and depopulation sending vacant lots and empty build-
more residents to seek a safe haven ings in Rhode Island’s urban
far away. centers and to turn tax losses
into tax revenues. To do so, we
That principle is where the interests need to beef up our existing in-
of community development and centives and assistance for
smart growth meet. Community brownfields redevelopment and
developers, at their best, preserve streamline building rehab
and rebuild older homes, strengthen codes to promote more reuse of
businesses and business districts, existing homes and buildings.4
promote employment, improve secu-
rity, restore parks and public spaces, Meanwhile, community developers
and work with governments to raise are increasingly recognizing a stake
the quality of public services and in the deliberations of regional and
infrastructure. By restoring amenities smart growth forces far beyond their
and the quality of life, and by pursu- neighborhood boundaries. Not all of
ing mixed-income communities, them have yet arrived at that recog-
Community they regain or hold onto population nition (we’ll say more about the rea-
developers more and investment, and thus help calm sons for that momentarily), but par-
the ripples of disinvestment, decay, ticularly among the older and more
and more seek to and flight. Arguably, any realistic accomplished community develop-
be at a common approach to smart growth (in fact, ment groups, it has become fairly
table with regional the very thing that makes it “smart”) common to see strategic planning
planners, state and starts with the assumption that that incorporates initiatives in
suburban neighborhoods at the core of metro- regional transportation, economic
politan areas need to maintain or development, and community
governments, and increase their population levels if the renewal. Community developers
other smart-growth whole region isn’t just going to more and more seek to be at a com-
players, looking for sprawl into eternity. mon table with regional planners,
ways to improve state and suburban governments,
regional housing, Leaders of the smart growth move- and other smart-growth players,
ment, even if they have not always looking for ways to improve regional
commercial recognized community development housing, commercial development,
development, and as a natural ally, have increasingly and job markets. Many more com-
job markets. embraced the aims of community munity development organizations
Page 5

are now branching into, or being tious in the process. To see in more
created in, suburban communities. detail how community developers
The reason for this confluence of have arrived at the smart growth
interests is not that either side has table, we start by considering some
received some sudden bolt of recent experience in three areas:
enlightenment about modern metro- transportation, business develop-
politan theory. Like most productive ment, and the “new urbanism.” At
coalitions, it has come about because the end, we will knit these experi-
each side has been pursuing its fun- ences into a larger picture that sug-
damental interests and mission, and gests how the movements can be
grown both wiser and more ambi- brought even closer together.

Where Community Development


and Smart Growth Are Meeting
1. Connecting neighborhoods the neighborhood. What the resi-
with regional transportation dents saw — and transit engineers As their name
As their name implies, community initially did not — was the possibilty implies, community
development organizations combine of using the new transit station and development
a developer’s sense of opportunity associated commercial development organizations
with the community’s sense of its to unite two residential communities combine a
own potential, needs, and assets. This that had been separated by an elevat-
ed highway and by the derelict site developer’s sense
eye for spotting local opportunity
can often be just as useful in design- on which the maintenance facility of opportunity with
ing “smart” transportation and was to be built. the community’s
growth efforts as is the more abstract sense of its own
expertise of the professional planner. They imagined creating commercial potential, needs,
facilities, parking, and “buffering”
Consider the case of the planned
and assets.
developments around and above the
Franklin Avenue transit stop in maintenance yard. Orienting the
Minneapolis — where transportation development toward Franklin
planners had proposed to locate a Avenue, just at the spot where the
large maintenance facility, in keeping elevated highway divides the two
with what they regarded as the main- neighborhoods, would bring pedes-
ly industrial (and unsightly) character trians, motorists, and transit users
of the neighborhood. Neighbors, together from both sides of the
understandably, saw the area and its highway. And it would restore a feel-
possibilities differently. Without dis- ing of productive use to what would
puting that the system needed a otherwise be just another forbidding
maintenance yard, the community industrial area. With some explaining
development group called Seward and negotiation, the vision found a
Redesign invited residents to a pub- receptive audience with the region’s
lic forum to suggest ways of meeting Metropolitan Council, which award-
both the system’s needs and those of ed Seward Redesign a planning grant
Page 6

to put flesh on the idea. The com- nity group, called Bethel New Life,
munity organization then Inc., and a private joint-venture
approached potential partners, partner, roughly half the residential
including health care and education- land came from the Chicago
al institutions, as possible developers Housing Authority (the rest was
and tenants at the site. The project is acquired privately). Down-payment
still in development — but it is a assistance comes from a city bond
profoundly different undertaking program, government grants and tax
today from what it would have been benefits are subsidizing portions of
without the influence of Seward the development budget, and most
Redesign and its constituents. of all, the site’s locational appeal
comes from the Transit Authority’s
A similar story took shape around newly renovated station in West
the underused “El” station in the Garfield Park, part of a $300 million
Chicago neighborhood of West modernization of the Green Line.
Garfield Park. When the city pro- One neighborhood’s effort to rescue
posed to shut down the Chicago its transit station ended up strength-
Transit Authority’s Green Line, the ening a whole corridor of city and
plan would have left only a west- suburban neighborhoods, and the
bound commuter line traveling the transportation that unites them.
same route. The commuter line,
however, would not serve West The case of the Fruitvale Transit
Garfield Park or many of the other Village in Oakland, California, may
neglected city neighborhoods along by now be the most famous example
the way. In response, a community of local and regional needs leading to
organization with roots in the local a single, smart solution. In Fruitvale,
Baptist church began trading ideas transportation planners had original-
with other Green Line neighbor- ly imagined a new transit station as
hoods, with Chicago development mostly a giant park-and-ride zone,
and transit officials, and with inner- and their main vision for it was to
ring suburban governments. Not build a parking garage. This was, at
only did they find a far more atten- first, a good example of the kind of
tive audience for their ideas than growth that isn’t “smart.” Viewing
they might have seen ten or 20 years the transit line as mainly a way of
before, but they found themselves getting out of the neighborhood
pursuing a classic “outside game,” all (presumably to get to jobs in the
in the name of rescuing one neigh- suburbs or downtown), planners
borhood’s link to transportation and seemed to be paying more attention
jobs. to their riders’ destination than to
their origins. It was good for the
Today, a 23,000-square-foot Transit suburban periphery and for the cen-
Center is in development at Lake tral business district. But it effective-
and Pulaski, along with an enclave of ly treated the underused middle —
50 new three-bedroom houses a the struggling residential area around
block away. Though these projects the Fruitvale station — as irrelevant.
are being carried out by the commu- Then a community development
Page 7

corporation (CDC) weighed in. The hood as a business opportunity, both


Unity Council, buttressed by years for the transit system and for mer-
of organizing and working with local chants, and not merely as a point of
merchants and residents, offered the departure for other, more desirable
regional transit officials a different locales. Not incidentally, the project
vision of the proposed station: one also creates a superior housing oppor-
that would actually boost ridership, tunity for the housing-strapped San
besides making a community asset Francisco Bay Area. The improved
out of something that would other- transit station and the new amenities
wise have been a development alba- around it make the neighborhood
tross. The unfolding Transit Village more desirable to residents, who are
— with new stores and restaurants, also likely customers of the Transit
renovation and strengthening of cur- Village businesses.
rent businesses, a cluster of new
housing, and open space — now Third, the development also incor-
seems like such an obviously good porates a neighborhood project that
idea that people may eventually for- aims at strengthening current busi-
get that it didn’t happen automati- nesses and improving commercial
cally. Someone needed to conceive it, real estate. That program operates
sell it to transit officials, and then alongside the development of new
help develop and market the vision. stores and housing at the transit site.
That someone needed to know the The whole package — existing busi-
neighborhood’s strengths well nesses, plus new ones, plus housing,
enough to imagine how they could parking, and mass transit — illus-
be enlarged and built on. As often trates the web of interrelated inter-
happens, the someone was a com- ests that can make community devel-
munity development organization. opment indistinguishable from smart
metropolitan planning, at least
Three things make this example sig- where underdeveloped urban neigh-
nificant far beyond Oakland. First, it borhoods and regional transporta-
represents a story not mainly about tion plans converge.
confrontation between community
developers and a regional agency, but 2. Salvaging commercial and
real collaboration. (Yes, the regional industrial space, and the jobs
authorities needed some persuading that go with it
at first, but so do most government It is axiomatic that where jobs go,
bureaucracies. This was not a funda- population follows. Consequently,
mentally rancorous negotiation.) The for those seeking to discourage out-
premise was mutually appealing: ward sprawl and redirect population
The more lively and attractive the pressures inward, a crucial goal is to
Transit Village becomes, the more attract employers and business
likely it is that people will use the investment toward more central
transit system. neighborhoods. That is the same
goal that community development
Second, the plans for the Transit organizations are pursuing in many
Village treat the inner-city neighbor- of the same neighborhoods, in the
Page 8

hope of boosting employment and center that anchors the eastern


opportunity for their residents — or neighborhoods’ fragile commercial
even, more basically, of salvaging corridor along Brush Creek.
industrial areas that have fallen into Community Builders recognized in
vacancy and disrepair. the mid-1990s that, except for the
Swope Parkway Health Center, the
So if the motives of regionalists and corridor’s economic strengths lay
So if the motives community developers are slightly almost entirely to the west. The
of regionalists different — growth management for community group’s challenge was
and community the one, income opportunity and therefore to draw some of that
developers are real-estate preservation for the other development potential eastward —
— their targets and interests are starting with a derelict parcel that for
slightly different quite often identical. A good illustra- years had contained a scrap yard and
— growth tion is the development of the a cluster of abandoned houses.
management for Brush Creek Corridor in Kansas
the one, income City, Missouri. Kansas City had At that parcel, the two visions met:
opportunity and authorized a Tax-Increment smarter development patterns for
Financing (TIF) District to spur the region, productive land use and
real-estate development eastward along Brush more jobs for the neighborhood.
preservation for Creek, on the inner side of a sym- Neither the regionalists nor the
the other — their bolic dividing line at Troost Avenue, community developers initially
targets and which historically separated the sought each other out as partners,
interests are poorer, mostly African American but both recognized the opportunity
east and the more affluent western for partnership when they saw it.
quite often identi- neighborhoods. It is the point from
cal. which, in the immediate postwar With the financial sweetener of TIF-
years, white flight, development, and generated financing, Community
westward sprawl took off. The TIF Builders set out to create an attrac-
was meant to help nudge investment tive, safe environment with new
and growth back eastward, across housing, a large, refurbished park,
the divider. and, on the scrap-yard site, a com-
mercial development with a signa-
Turn now to Community Builders of ture corporate tenant — eventually a
Kansas City, a community develop- central service facility for H&R
ment corporation whose interest is Block. Safety was a crucial consider-
not primarily in altering develop- ation, given that the run-down con-
ment patterns across the metropoli- dition of the site had made it a
tan area, but in creating opportunity breeding-ground of vandalism and
for residents of the Mount petty crime. So after its initial work
Cleveland and Sheraton Estates to develop the $20 million Health
neighborhoods, which lie east of Center, Community Builders spent
Troost Avenue. Community Builders several years developing new hous-
was organized with help from the ing and a child care facility, to
Swope Parkway Health Center, a upgrade the appearance of the area,
major clinic and family development boost street traffic, and attract stable
Page 9

residents. The group formed a spe- themselves marching in the same


cial security initiative with the direction. And the direction is east.
Kansas City police to ensure that
residents, both new and old, felt As a meeting-ground for regional
safe. Soon the houses were begin- and neighborhood visions, few
ning to rise in value (they would places can be as compelling (or, by
climb nearly 40 percent in five some lights, as intimidating) as the
years). Crime was sharply down, and brownfields of Allegheny West, a
applicants were queuing up for a neighborhood just north of center-
chance to live in the neighborhood. city Philadelphia. In Allegheny West,
Then came H&R Block, and the the local community development
commercial parcel had its signature organization has zeroed in on 15
tenant. The meaning of all these industrial hulks as prime locations
steps depends in part on the side of for new commercial and industrial
the smart growth table from which development. Many of the sites have
you view them. Seen one way, all of environmental histories that will
them are essential to the broad, require mitigation, and nearly all of
regional push for more eastward them present an uninviting picture
development. Seen the other way, to a casual shopper for industrial
they are pure “inside game:” new real estate. Not so long ago, region-
jobs, new development, and safer alists might have seen these sites as a
streets for a single neighborhood. perfect example of the hopelessness
of central neighborhoods, and a rea-
To show how thoroughly those two son to turn their attention outward.
viewpoints have converged, Community developers might have
Community Builders is now a key sought simply to have the remaining
member of Brush Creek Partners — buildings leveled in the hope of put-
a nonprofit civic association made ting some housing, or maybe a park,
up of businesses, churches, schools on the cleared land.
and neighborhood groups from
both sides of Troost. The Partners But in Allegheny West, as in many
group now takes an active interest in older urban neighborhoods, two
promoting the Community Builders’ important things have happened to
eastward development program. But change those attitudes in recent
as The Kansas City Star put it, “They years. First, the environmental con-
aren’t pushing to improve neighbor- sequences of the “live and let die”
hoods east of Troost Avenue just approach — the presumption that
out of altruism. … They want old urban parcels outlive their eco-
healthy surroundings to mesh with nomic worth and must eventually be
hundreds of millions of dollars written off — have become dismally
invested west of Troost.” Suddenly, clear: a hemorrhage of concrete
through the power of successful and asphalt into the surrounding
investment and some creative coali- countryside, as businesses abandon
tion-building, the two sides of the established industrial areas for new
Troost Avenue race barrier find territory farther and farther away
Page 10

from the urban core. Alarmed over to new owners. The committee
this loss of greenspace, states such shepherds each of the sites through
as Pennsylvania have passed increas- the remediation and rehab process,
ingly favorable laws and regulations to preserve momentum and to
to lure investors back to the aban- ensure that the end uses measure up
doned industrial zones, often known to their potential.
as brownfields. In 2002, the federal
government followed suit. The point is not simply that these
Recent theories properties now have a team of
clustered under Second, the employment conse- organized, dedicated advocates for
the heading of quences have been devastating for development (though that is, by
“new urbanism” the residents of the abandoned itself, important news in Allegheny
older neighborhoods. West). The more far-reaching point
and “livable Disproportionately unemployed and is that this team is a state-local col-
communities” — poor, many are unable either to relo- laboration; includes representatives
entailing mixed- cate to the remote locations where of government, business, and resi-
use planning and the jobs have gone, or even, in many dents as well as community develop-
development, cases, to commute there. For com- ers; and pursues an agenda of con-
munity developers, it is no longer siderable importance to the whole
more open enough simply to beautify the empty Philadelphia region, not merely to
architecture and factories and industrial property. one neighborhood. That is, to many
public spaces, Success now depends on replacing eyes, the future of regionalism in
traffic calming, not just the architecture, but the southeastern Pennsylvania, economi-
and environments employment potential of those cally, socially, and environmentally.
properties.
that invite walking 3. The regional value of
and provide plenty Chastened by these lessons, leaders mixed-use development and
of access for from both the community and the the ‘new urbanism’
pedestrians — are region now sit on a working com- Recent theories clustered under the
perfectly aligned mittee, convened by the community- heading of “new urbanism” and “liv-
based Allegheny West Foundation, able communities” — entailing
with the purposes to tackle the 15 targeted brownfield mixed-use planning and develop-
of both community parcels. The committee consists of ment, more open architecture and
development and local business associations, the city’s public spaces, traffic calming, and
smart growth. Department of Commerce, the state environments that invite walking and
Environmental Council, staff mem- provide plenty of access for pedestri-
bers from the Pennsylvania Senate ans — are perfectly aligned with the
and the City Council, and residents purposes of both community devel-
and business people from the neigh- opment and smart growth. If both
borhood. Two years into the effort, are concerned with creating stable
the committee has performed envi- residential markets and “communities
ronmental assessments on 12 of the of choice,” retarding flight and
15 sites, identified new uses and encouraging inward development,
even some tenants for several of then both have much to gain from
them, and conveyed two properties the tenets of the “new urbanism.”
Page 11

Here’s one example: suburb. Winchester Greens merges


The development of Winchester suburban quiet, space, and security
Greens in Greater Richmond, with urban-style advantages like a
Virginia, combines clusters of gen- mixed population, easy pedestrian
teel townhomes, some for families shopping, affordable rental apart-
and others for the elderly (with sin- ments and home-ownership possibil-
gle-family houses next in produc- ities, and (for the first time) good
tion), a child care center, and open transportation connections to the
play fields and recreation space inte- city and the hinterland. Until the
grated into the design. Shopping is new development, the closest public
nearby, and more retail space is transportation to the site had been
being developed in tandem with the some two miles away. Some of the
new housing. The village atmosphere new transportation was the result of
of Winchester Greens blends sound true smart growth negotiations
economics, energy efficiency, and among the project’s community
good architecture, making an area developers, the metropolitan
that is inviting for pedestrians and Chamber of Commerce, state legis-
children at play, where elderly and lators, and the Greater Richmond
younger residents intermingle, and Transportation Company.
shops cater to a steady clientele of
neighbors and walk-ins. Winchester Greens proves several
points at once: that balanced, attrac-
As such, it’s a good exhibit of the tive design can make a community
principles of the “new urbanism.” out of a stretch of neglected real
Although it’s a community develop- estate; that such communities can
ment project, it’s located not in attract both investment and muni-
Richmond, but in a suburb, the cipal services that would otherwise
aging bedroom community of flow elsewhere; and that all of this
Chesterfield County. But apart from can be — in fact, needs to be — a
the suburban locale, what makes it common endeavor of smart regional
significant to the wider region? The planners and equally smart commu-
answer is the development’s underly- nity developers.
ing purpose: not just to brighten a
distressed or neglected piece of real To slow or reverse the march of
estate, but to help redirect develop- population and capital into undevel-
ment and transportation patterns oped areas, states will need to re-
inward, away from Richmond’s ever- examine the way they use housing
receding sprawl line. subsidies, building codes, infrastruc-
ture planning, and land-use policy in
Positioned on a major commuting older urban areas. They will have to
corridor, the 80-acre development is do so in ways that don’t alienate sub-
aimed at attracting residents, mer- urbs — where the preponderance of
chants, and (most important) trans- local wealth and political power usu
portation to a central place that ally lies — and yet that boost in-fill
blends the advantages of city and development within existing urban
Page 12

and metropolitan boundaries. There One illustration of what the New


is some encouraging, if still early, Jersey code can do comes from the
evidence that states are asking intelli- aging industrial city of Elizabeth —
gent questions along these lines, and in fact, from that city’s poorest and
could come up with creative solu- most deteriorated neighborhood,
tions. Where that is happening, called Elizabethport. There, in 1997,
effective community development a community development organiza-
organizations are likely to be crucial tion called PROCEED (the Puerto
in making those solutions work. Rican Organization for Community
Education and Economic Develop-
An example of sophisticated state ment) used the code to renovate an
policy for encouraging inward devel- abandoned warehouse and clothing
opment is in New Jersey, where the store. The building is now a modern
state created an unusual sub-section child-care center for 60 children, with
of its building code specifically for an accompanying outdoor play-
rehabilitation of older structures. The ground and 10,000 square feet of
Rehabilitation Code eliminates some office space for social service organiza-
high-cost requirements that were tions. The total cost of $1.2 million
designed for new construction and was substantially lower than it would
that apply poorly (sometimes destruc- have been two or three years earlier,
tively) to older buildings. It takes under the old code. At the much-
much of the guesswork and need for higher price, the project wouldn’t
variances out of the approval process have been feasible. The warehouse
for rehabs. One state official estimat- rehabilitation has since sparked other
ed that the new code routinely economic development projects in
reduces costs in rehabilitation by one- the neighborhood, including the
quarter, and has sometimes shaved expansion of existing businesses and
up to 40 percent. It cost the state the opening of several new restau-
nothing to make these changes (apart rants. Several of the new and expand-
from years of hard work and delicate ed enterprises were made possible by
negotiations), yet it represents a sub- the flexibility of the new code.
stantial fiscal stimulus for develop-
ment in older city neighborhoods — Improving the already-developed
and, not incidentally, in aging suburbs. core of sprawling metropolitan areas
will be essential for slowing their
In the first year the new code was in outward expansion. But it is not yet
place, the pace of new rehabilitation a process that comes naturally to the
projects in New Jersey surged from a free, unguided market most of the
two percent increase the prior year to time. States that are serious about
as much as an 84 percent increase in preserving greenspace, limiting traf-
Jersey City, 59 percent in Newark, and fic congestion, and salvaging their
20 percent in Trenton. The effective- historic population centers thus need
ness of the new code has drawn the to move, as New Jersey and
attention of other states, particularly Maryland have done, toward a sys-
Maryland and Delaware, which have tem of incentives, rewards, and lead-
written new rehab codes of their own. ership in behalf of older, more cen-
Page 13

tral neighborhoods. That is happen- tions and their supporters should


ing, and increasingly the advocates likewise be discovering the benefits
of smart growth and regionalism are of jumping on the regional band-
providing some of the impetus to wagon. That is happening, but it has
nudge states in that direction. proven to be more of a challenge
than one might think. The next sec-
As that trend progresses, regionalists tion discusses some of the reasons
are increasingly discovering what why this is so, and what could be done
they can gain from community to accelerate the process of learning,
development. At the same time, interaction, and collaboration.
community development organiza-

Impediments to a Smart Growth–


Community Development Alliance
The argument thus far, and some of must be acknowledged, mutual
the examples attached to it, might stereotypes. Some metropolitan the-
seem to make the prospect of a orists, including some very promi-
neighborhood-regional alliance seem nent ones, continue to think and
almost obvious — a matter of time, write about community develoment
perhaps, but surely inevitable. Yet in as if it were some leftover tool of a
reality, there is not yet a broad con- defunct urban socialism, as if little
sensus in either camp about the mer- had changed, either tactically or ide-
its of such an alliance or the oppor- ologically, since the 1960s. And a
tunities that it might bring. The few leaders of community develop-
examples we have cited are not yet ment, perhaps bruised by past
typical, although all of them were rebuffs from state and suburban
undertaken in the course of normal power centers, have gone some
business, not mainly for the sake of lengths to distance themselves from
proving a point or pioneering some what some still regard as antithetical,
power realignment. Leaders in these hostile outside interests.
cases really did see a natural harmo-
ny between the “inside” and “out- It is certainly true that a few com-
side” game. But they are not yet typ- munity organizations, including a
ical of every place. few longstanding and accomplished
ones, cling to the idea that all neigh-
Most of the cause of this persistent borhood development must be of a
separation arises from the contrast- single kind, to serve a single clientele
ing histories we described at the — that all housing must be subsi-
beginning of this paper. The differ- dized for the very poor, or that all
ences in those histories have been businesses must be small and indige-
reinforced over time by different nous, or that all new job creation
styles of operation, contrasting must be concentrated in the neigh-
philosophical orthodoxies — and, it borhoods where unemployed people
Page 14

live. Those positions, whatever their to be sure, have been actively dis-
merits, are unlikely to leave much couraged from such interaction by
room for collaboration with adher- demagogues of both the urban and
ents of smart growth, among whom suburban camps.) If such divisive
mixed communities and diverse local elements exist among metropolitan
economies are bedrock principles. leaders, they tend not to be well rep-
resented in smart growth circles,
But those bedrock principles are by which offer little comfort or oppor-
The actual agenda now also in the mainstream of most tunity for anyone bent on exclusion
of smart growth community development thinking and enforced homogeneity. The
lends itself to both nationwide. Today, the phrases actual agenda of smart growth lends
regional equity “mixed-income” and “mixed-use itself to both regional equity and
communities” are bywords of neigh- diversity — values that require some
and diversity — borhood redevelopment as much as vision, but no particular class per-
values that require of regional planning, though the spective, to embrace and defend.
some vision, but idea is still held back by a lack of
no particular class adequate policy and tax tools. Not The truth is that both community
perspective, to all community development advo- development and smart growth trace
cates have been expert at making the their origins to some degree of
embrace and “mixed” message clear, but the point political divisiveness and class
defend. is eloquently made in the actual resentments, a difficult but
work that community developers inescapable heritage that lingers,
have been doing for the past ten to albeit in shadow form, to this day.
20 years. The caricature of commu- Where those resentments persist,
nity development as a plan for con- one might argue, they tend to reduce
centrating the poor in “gilded ghet- the effectiveness of whatever side
toes” is an impressively durable continues to cling to them. But the
myth, but a myth all the same. mere fact that biases and stereotypes
are counterproductive has rarely
Similarly, there are surely some sub- been enough to make them disap-
urban and regional leaders whose pear. A stronger remedy usually
hope is to confine poverty to the comes from the growth of wiser
inner cities and to preserve the eco- leadership, dedicated to building
nomic homogeneity of outlying alliances rather than stoking distrust,
areas. Likewise there are leaders in and from the rallying of wider and
inner cities and inner suburbs who wider support to that leadership.
view the infill development agenda Such voices are now being heard on
of smart growth only as a Trojan both sides, but not everywhere, and
horse bringing with it gentrification not yet loudly enough to command
and displacement. But the image of the national attention of their
a monolithic suburban elite fixated respective camps.
on containing the poor is likewise a
crude stereotype, held primarily by Two other factors have served to
urban residents who have had too slow what might otherwise have
little opportunity to interact with been a natural joining of forces. The
their surrounding neighbors. (Some, first involves resources: Community
Page 15

development organizations tend to The final obstacle is so basic it is


be thinly staffed. The best of them often overlooked: There is a funda-
— with sizable real estate holdings mental structural difference between
and with programs and partnerships the way smart growth and communi-
spanning multiple disciplines — ty development forces are organized.
already demand more than an aver- The former have regional and
age commitment of time and energy statewide concerns as their mandate,
from the people who work for and they exist primarily in the form
them. Devoting time to travel to of organized coalitions of disparate
regional or statewide meetings, jurisdictions and local interests. Their
spending hours networking with members, to some degree, set their
unfamiliar groups and leaders, and parochial concerns aside (or try to do
learning unfamiliar issues and sys- so) when they convene in these
tems — these things are not just regional bodies. That is their explicit
time-consuming, but they represent mandate. Community developers, by
a big wager on an uncertain and contrast, exist because of their paro-
sometimes distant payoff. A com- chial interests; they have few forums
munity development staff whose in which they are called to represent
calendar is already overfull may not something larger than the needs and
easily see the virtue in that gamble; plans of their particular community,
but even if they do, some may sim- and those forums tend to be more
ply have no hours to devote to it, for mutual support and information
however eager they might be. exchange than for taking common
action on some unified agenda.
The same is true of smart growth
coalitions, whose members tend to Community development intermedi-
be fully occupied in other work, and aries have increasingly trained their Community
may have responsibility for regional focus on state and regional trade development
growth only among dozens of other groups as part of both their program intermediaries
responsibilities that fill their daily and policy strategies. For example, in have increasingly
schedule. Particularly if they have southwestern Pennsylvania, the San
trained their focus
had little luck in reaching out to Francisco Bay Area, Milwaukee, or
neighborhood groups in the past Seattle, the Local Initiatives Support on state and
(or, perhaps, if they have merely Corporation (LISC) is designing pro- regional trade
assumed their luck would be bad), grams around explicitly regional or groups as part
finding time for an uncertain statewide strategies, in which the field of both their
courtship on the far horizon of their office supports the revitalization of
program and
region may seem too much of a neighborhoods in wide geographic
stretch. On either side of the divid- areas. In other cases, including Ohio, policy strategies.
ing line, it seems, the barriers can California, and Florida, LISC’s pro-
seem just high enough to overwhelm grams have deliberately sought to
the small resources available to over- promote statewide coalitions from
come them. The result is an oppor- multiple sectors, including neighbor-
tunity for mutual reinforcement that hoods and municipalities, businesses,
many can see but few can seize. regional bodies, state policymakers,
and philanthropic or civic leadership.
Page 16

Community development coalitions are, first, leadership with real stature


have in some cases grown stronger in regional or statewide policy circles,
and more ambitious in recent years and second, staff with enough
— an encouraging trend, but one expertise to analyze, propose, and
that still has plenty of room to grow. negotiate policies with depth and
The two qualities that are most likely sophistication. None of that comes
to make these groups more effective inexpensively — which helps explain
participants in the smart growth field why it’s still developing.

Four General
Opportunities for Funders: Accelerating the
Approaches Smart Growth–Community Development Alliance
for Funders
The impediments we have just growth advocates who see one
(1) Leadership described — historical separation, another as political and intellectual
and vision structural differences, and a still- adversaries, a few funders have stark-
(2) Funding emerging network of state and ly chosen one path over the other as
regional community development the best, or most effective, or simply
instruments
coalitions — are all areas in which “right” avenue for neighborhood or
of collaboration funders’ leadership and strategic regional well-being. Regardless of
(3) Supporting grantmaking could be crucial. We which choice they make, the very act
research and offer here four general approaches of seeing the two sides as alternative
development by which funders could encourage rather than complementary goals
on ways of more collaboration and guide the contributes to a pattern of division
blending the two sides toward a clearer vision of that serves neither side well.
their joint opportunities: (1)
two agendas
Leadership and vision; (2) Funding To be sure, most funders have taken
(4) Attracting instruments of collaboration; (3) a more nuanced and constructive
attention and Supporting research and develop- view of the matter, even if they have
discussion to ment on ways of blending the two weighted their grantmaking more
those areas agendas; and (4) Attracting attention heavily in one direction or the other.
where the and discussion to those areas where For those who see past the superficial
alliance is the alliance is working. divisions and false choices, there is an
opportunity for leadership both with-
working 1. Leadership in philanthropy and at the front lines
Funders, it must be said, have them- of neighborhood and regional devel-
selves been affected by some of the opment. It may be helpful, for
barriers and historical divisions we starters, for alert grantmakers to note
referred to earlier. Among some fun- when their colleagues or grantees
ders, no less than among some lead- seem to be clinging to old dicho-
ers in the field, the needs of neigh- tomies, and simply to draw attention
borhoods and of regions have some- and discussion to those instances.
times been treated as an either/or Even within a single foundation,
choice. Just as there are some com- there may be separate programs or
munity developers and some smart grantmaking strategies for communi-
Page 17

ty development and smart growth — take the lead in the whole, slow
partitions that could be breached by bridge-building exercise that a last-
bringing colleagues together for dis- ing alliance would demand in each
cussion and to consider grants that metropolitan area. To support that
span the two objectives. Often, sever- more painstaking kind of work, fun-
al divisions might benefit from such ders might prefer to rely on national
discussions, as when a foundation has and regional intermediaries and on
separate programs in social equity, effective state or regional networks
urban or metropolitan affairs, organ- and coalitions where they exist.
izing, workforce development, and Funding staff and programs specifi-
the environment. cally dedicated to building and refin-
ing partnerships between communty
In the field, funders sometimes have developers and smart growth cham-
more ability to summon unfamiliar pions would be a way of signaling
parties to a common table than any that such partnerships are important
of those parties would have had on to the future of both movements.
their own. In field visits, in confer- Either on their own or through
ences and exploratory meetings, and intermediaries, funders can support
in supporting research or policy ini- replicable projects that combine
tiatives, funders have an ability to both constituencies, and encourag-
draw each side’s attention to the ing other communities to study and
opportunities presented by the other replicate those demonstrations.
side. While a coercive approach
would surely be counterproductive, But apart from supporting particular
funders can readily create low-pres- programs or initiatives, grants for
sure opportunities for the two sides the growth of effective state and
to get acquainted and exchange per- regional community development
spectives — an essential first step networks in general would be a use-
toward any broader collaboration. ful way of overcoming the structural
obstacles we described earlier. In
In any case, philanthropy’s “bully some states (fewer and fewer, as
pulpit” is a still-underused resource time goes on) there is almost no
for spreading the message that the effective vehicle through which
two sides can and should be working community development groups can
more closely together. Quite apart act collectively, or form broad-based
from any funding decisions, grant- alliances with other constituencies.
makers could provide a leadership Helping to start or solidify broadly
nudge, and a well-articulated vision based trade groups in those
of neighborhood-regional alliances, instances could make an important
both of which are still sorely lacking long-term difference. But in most
in many places. places, the state and regional coali-
tions already exist and are doing
2. Funding instruments work of real importance to their
of collaboration members. The issue in these more
Most grantmakers could not — and numerous places is not whether a
would not want to — personally state or regional group would be
Page 18

helpful, but what it would be helpful already at work on issues of regional


for — and specifically, how much of transportation, economic develop-
its time and effort should be devot- ment, and mixed-use neighborhoods
ed to the opportunities created by is rising. Some at the leading edge of
smart growth. the curve — including those we
cited earlier — are already forming
Among those cases, funders, inter- the kinds of alliances with regional
mediaries, and community develop- leaders that should, in time, become
ment groups need to think together the norm. Funders have an opportu-
about where they might find the nity either to support further work
greatest opportunities for construc- among these pioneers or to fund the
tive bridge-building. That entail sask- next generation of community
ing some fairly basic tactical ques- developers who are just now looking
tions: What kinds of capacity, in outward for regional partners. Either
which states, aimed at which issues, way, intermediaries can be helpful in
would make the most difference in spotting opportunity and in deliver-
building community development ing technical assistance. But some
effectively into the smart growth dis- support also needs to be aimed
cussion? Where are state or regional specifically at the communities and
discussions forming the most quick- organizations where the case is now
ly, or showing the most promise? being proven.
Where do community development
actors have the most to offer? 3. Supporting research and
development on ways of
These questions naturally produce blending the two agendas
Most public policy different answers in different places. Most public policy on urban and
on urban and Answering them wisely in each set- metropolitan development tends to
metropolitan devel- ting is a challenge that community focus on the problems of low-
opment tends to developers, funders, government, income neighborhoods or on sprawl
and potential smart growth allies and smart growth, but hardly ever
focus on the prob- need to tackle together. Little of that on both topics together. Think tanks
lems of low-income will happen without some fiscal and university centers, with only the
neighborhoods or stimulus. Even in the cases with the occasional exception, have likewise
on sprawl and highest potential, there will be a tended to stick to their disciplinary
smart growth, but need for some statewide or regional niches, specializing in one pursuit or
officials on both sides of the fence the other. As a result, policy ideas
hardly ever on both who can dedicate a portion of their that might bridge the two fields have
topics together. time to working out a common languished for lack of research,
agenda and devising ways of bring- demonstrations, and refinement.
ing their colleagues into more fre- Funders could bring both capital
quent contact. and attention to this problem by
supporting research and experimen-
Finally, the same can be said for tation on concrete practices that
support to individual community combine regional and neighborhood
development organizations. The planning and development. New
number of community developers techniques and policy ideas such as
Page 19

tools for mixed-income housing, similar collaboration. The volume of


manuals on incorporating green actual work continues to grow dra-
design with community develop- matically, although its volume sur-
ment, research on the best methods prises not only the occasional
of transit-oriented community observer, but community and smart
development (and their cost-effec- growth practitioners themselves.
tiveness) have all been broached
here and there, but all need far more Whatever funders may choose to do
thought and examination. Before a directly in supporting smart Whatever funders
strong public constituency can form growth–community development may choose to
around the intersection of these two partnerships, there is an important do directly in
fields, ideas about how they work indirect task to be addressed as well: supporting smart
together need to become more con- Work in this area needs to be better
crete, more thoroughly tested, and publicized, discussed, understood, growth–community
more widely understood. and replicated. Conferences, publica- development
tions, and opportunities for discus- partnerships,
4. Stimulating attention sion are far too scarce. The mutual there is an
and discussion misperceptions and stereotypes we important
For all the rumblings of activity discussed earlier might unravel a
described in this paper, the connec- good deal faster if the channels for indirect task to
tion between smart growth and communication between the two be addressed as
community development remains a sides were wider. well: Work in this
boutique topic, appreciated by a few area needs to be
adepts and trail-blazers, but not There is, of course, a danger in better publicized,
enshrined in any set of trade groups, focusing any funding portfolio too
intellectual forums, or deliberative intensely on conferences and studies, discussed,
organizations. There is, for example, which can sometimes be the last understood, and
no Journal of Smart Growth and refuge of an unimaginative grant replicated.
Community Development. Very few program. But in this case, informa-
organizations embrace both goals. tion is at least half the battle. Trust
Whenever the combined topic is built partly on understanding, and
comes up at national and regional understanding feeds on facts. A fun-
conferences, or in public policy cir- ders’ agenda for community devel-
cles, the response usually reflects opment and smart growth surely
more enthusiasm than information begins with support for actual col-
or experience. laboration, for projects of local and
regional significance, and for the
Worst of all, the community devel- people and organizations that do
opment and smart growth leaders this work. But in this case, those
who now work creatively together people and organizations also
have little sense that they are part of urgently need to share what they
any national trend. Most of the have accomplished, to learn what
community developers profiled in others have done, and to seed a
this report were aware of only a lim- national discussion that, for the
ited number of other instances of most part, has yet to begin.
Sources for Cited Examples
Allegheny West Foundation Puerto Rican Organization for
Ronald Hinton Community Education and
Executive Director Community Builders Economic Development
2801 W. Hunting Park Avenue of Kansas City (PROCEED)
Philadelphia, PA 19129 Chuck Gatson Teresa Sato-Vega
(215) 225-1019 Executive Director Executive Director
www.alleghenywest 3801 Blue Parkway 1126 Dickinson Street
foundation.org Kansas City, MO 64130 Elizabeth, NJ 07201
(816) 922-7660 (908) 351-7727
Bethel New Life, Inc. www.PROCCEDINC@aol.com
Mary Nelson
Executive Director Seward Redesign
Local Initiatives Brian Miller
4950 West Thomas
Support Corporation Executive Director
Chicago, IL 60651
Julia Seward 2323 East Franklin
(773) 473-7870
Director of State Policy Minneapolis, MN 55406
www.bethelnewlife.org
1825 K Street, NW, Suite 1100 (612) 338-8729
Washington, DC 20006 www.sewardredesign.org
Better Housing Coalition (202) 739-9266
T.K. Somanath www.liscweb.org The Unity Council
Executive Director Arabella Martinez
100 West Franklin Street Executive Director
Richmond, VA 23220 1900 Fruitvale Avenue, Suite 2A
(804) 644-0546 Oakland, CA 94601
www.betterhousingcoalition.org (510) 535-6900
www.unitycouncil.org

Endnotes
1. Tony Proscio is a writer and consultant to foundations and nonprofit organizations. He is co-author, with Paul S. Grogan, of
Comeback Cities: A Blueprint for Urban Neighborhood Revival (Westview Press, 2000).
2. See David Rusk, Inside Game/Outside Game: Winning Strategies for Saving Urban America, Washington: The Brookings Institution,
2001.
3. Not all rural communities, it must be said, were so adept or so enfranchised. Rural constituencies in some areas enjoyed political
influence out of proportion to their numbers, and in some of these places wealth was growing as well. These tended to be the rural
areas whose residents and leaders were in the vanguard of the anti-sprawl movement. But in many other parts of rural America,
growth has been nonexistent and population and wealth have been falling. There, quite often, community development was the
more influential movement, until the two ideas began to converge in more recent years.
4. “The Costs of Suburban Sprawl and Urban Decay in Rhode Island: Executive Summary,” by H.C. Planning Consultants, Inc., and
Planmetrics, LLP, for Grow Smart Rhode Island, December 1999, p. iv.

Hooper Brooks, Chair


L. Benjamin Starrett, Executive Director
Strengthening funders’ abilities to support
organizations working to build more livable
communities through smarter growth
policies and practices.
1500 San Remo Avenue, Suite 177
Coral Gables, Florida 33146
Phone: 305-667-6350
Fax: 305-667-6355
Email: ben@fundersnetwork.org
www.fundersnetwork.org

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen