What goes around…

By Guest Contributor Jamelle, originally published on United States of Jamerica and PostBourgie

suburbOn his blog earlier this week, Ryan Avent made a really insightful point about the legacy of the Baby Boomer’s attitudes towards urban/suburban design:

But the really interesting point to me is that the Boomers have also screwed themselves. The policies mentioned above — forcing developers to pay for infrastructure improvements, draconian limits on new taxes, strict constraints on new supply — have made California decidedly unfriendly to seniors. The Golden State would be a great place for one’s golden years, if only it were remotely affordable, and if one could get around without a car. But California is having a devil of a time financing new transit and rail infrastructure, and the few places that are transit accessible and walkable are the ones that have held up best amid the housing crunch; those 50% price reductions are coming in places that are useless for those unwilling to hop on a freeway.

You’re going to see this all over the country. A generation that worked very hard to build an urban geography suited to a nuclear family with young children is now getting old. What are they supposed to do with all these four bedroom homes that are a 15-minute drive from a cup of coffee and a newspaper?

Because we spend a fair amount of time commenting on racial politics, I’d be remiss if I didn’t at least mention the racial dimensions of the Boomers’ passion for big lawns, big houses, “draconian limits on new taxes” and “strict constraints on new supply.” In fact, I’m pretty sure that you can see where this is going.

There were two major periods of African-American migration in the 20th century. The first “Great Migration,” began in 1910 and saw approximately 1.6 million African-Americans migrate out of the South and to industrial centers throughout the country, ending around the time of the Great Depression. And while that resulted in some white out-migration from areas where blacks settled, it paled in comparison to the “white flight” which occurred during the second Great Migration. Between 1940 and 1970, almost 2 million African-Americans left the deep South for the cities, lured – as migrants usually are – by the promise of better jobs and opportunities for their families.

The resulting economic pressures (tight housing markets and such) along with robust federal subsidization of roads and suburban housing developments, pushed many white families to the suburbs. What’s more, is that there was a tremendous sense among white Americans that their new black neighbors would negatively impact the value of their homes and neighborhoods. And so, suburban townships and communities around the country adopted measures like exclusionary covenants (restricting landownership to a particular race) or redlining to prevent African-American migration to the suburbs. Indeed, some communities even went as far as using roads to isolate black neighborhoods (where automobile ownership was far less likely) from goods and services. The older suburban/exurban model of isolated neighborhoods connected by roads and strip malls owes its existence – in part – to a desire to keep African-Americans out of the suburbs.

Of course, as Avent notes, this has come back to bite the Boomers and their parents in the ass; the downside of designing neighborhoods in an exclusionary fashion is that it makes them virtually unlivable for someone who doesn’t own a vehicle or who because of age or infirmiry, can’t operate one.


Photo from Artenews

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • NewsVine
  • Current
  • email
  • Print

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. links for 2009-05-21 « Embololalia on 21 May 2009 at 2:34 pm

    [...] What goes around… at Racialicious – the intersection of race and pop culture The older suburban/exurban model of isolated neighborhoods connected by roads and strip malls owes its existence – in part – to a desire to keep African-Americans out of the suburbs. [...]

Comments

  1. atlasien wrote:

    Great point. Exurbs are totally inimical to multigenerational living.

    The trend of the future in some places (like metro Atlanta) is that exurbs are going to turn into slums. The situation is actually going to get worse for lower-income people/working poor — that is, people with enough resources to own a car, but not much else — because out in the exurbs there’s even less access to resources than in the inner city. And many of these exurb houses are going to decay rapidly, as they were built cheaply and don’t have the sturdy construction of, say, urban brick tenement houses built in the early part of the 20th century.

    The movement patterns of white people in these exurbs are going to get more complicated as new people move in. Some are going to stay put simply because they can’t afford to move, meaning these new “exurb-slums” are going to be fairly multiracial. Some of them are going to move far away to get away from minorities (in Georgia, this usually means moving to South Carolina). Some are going to move in the opposite direction, further into the city.

    Overall, around here there’s going to be a movement towards less segregation by race but more segregation by class.

  2. Iggles wrote:

    Wow, this post is enlightening. As an black american, part of me says, “Serves them right!”
    Thank you for shedding background on this.

    I know that Levittown excluded black people after WWII. But i didn’t know the design of the suburbs was built on racist principles..

  3. Jeremy wrote:

    Nate Silver (of fivethirtyeight.com fame) has a fascinating TED lecture related to this, in which he equates the physical land-use patterns of suburbs and exurbs with racist voting patterns.

    The basic idea is that the spatial arrangement of these burbs– cul-de-sacs, winding streets, dead-ends–make it far less likely to come into contact with your neighbors in a meaningful way, if at all. Though minority suburbanization is increasing dramatically (PEW released a study about a month ago), this spatial arrangement makes it more difficult to come into contact with peeps of another race, even if they live in your suburb.

    The result of less contact makes some white folks more likely to have said that race was a factor in their decision to vote for McCain this past November. It’s really a fascinating talk.

    As far as solutions, the New Urbanist movement is all about walkable neighborhoods, inclusion, and making the burbs more accessible for the elderly. However, the de facto leader of the New Urbanists, Andres Duany, has been quoted in interviews expressing his love for gentrification. In other words, the only real solution out there is closely linked to gentrification. Yeesh.

  4. politicallyincorrect wrote:

    That article is late and out of date. The surburbanites have realized that the long commutes are incovienent hence gentrification of American cities in recent years. They have given the poor section 8 vouchers, froze them out of the city real estate market and forced them to the suburbs where they can live in the foreclosed homes

  5. Pheagan wrote:

    Iggles– as a white American, that was my first thought too. Can’t drum up much sympathy for this particular plight. And, as someone who lives in LA without a car, I do not appreciate the suburban model at all, at all.

  6. Emmeaki wrote:

    So, THE MAN used roads to deliberately keep niggaz (excuse my language) from having access to goods and services.

    Forgive my bluntness, but this makes sense and it makes me angry. I am on a week-long visit with my family in Cleveland, OH and just yesterday, I was riding around with my cousin wondering why the hell people would want to live in this suburban isolation.

    It made be angry as I was reminded of growing up here in the inner-city and having to travel 30 min. to an hour (or more) on a bus just to get to a mall, movie theatre, or coffee shop.

    It makes me mad that my sick, older mother has to be driven by my uncle to the suburbs to get groceries because when her local supermarket chain was bought out, the new company took over all the stores except the ONE that was in a black neighborhood.

    But, back to the story. Now THEY’VE bitten themselves in the asses and they’re the ones who can’t get around. I would like to laugh and say “That’s what you get”, but it’s not just boomers and the older generations who are screwed, it’s young, African-Americans, like my cousins who were taught to aspire to getting a house in the suburbs and escape the ghetto. Now they are screwed as well when the car breaks down and there’s just no money to get it fixed.

    It baffles me as to why one would choose such severe isolation. I think about seeing help wanted signs at every other store in a strip mall some years back. Even a McDonald’s (in the middle of some new development) was offering $7.00/hr because they were so far outside of the city and couldn’t find workers.

    The opposite side of this is poor, inner-city residences of all races who can’t find jobs because restaurants, stores, coffee shops, etc. are so far from where they live and inaccessible by bus.

    After living in Brooklyn, NY for 8 years, the urban sprawl seems even more depressing. The only reason NYC is still intact is because Manhattan is a freakin’ island and there’s nowhere else to go!

    Why are so many Americans obese? Simple, they have no choice but to get in a car and drive everywhere because simple goods and services are not in walking distance. I think I’m just ranting now, but it’s true, what goes around comes around.

  7. chicagorose wrote:

    Reverse white flight’s been happening quite a bit in Chicago. Everything atlasien stated has already taken place in the southern suburbs. I’ve never seen so much sand blasting of inner city brick apartments and houses in my life. Brick bungalows have become the new chic and gone up in value. In part, it can’t be helped, economic development had been stagnated for so long; Mayor Daley tried to get the ball rolling by moving out of Bridgeport, (a neighborhood that still gives me the shudders to think about) and into a newly built housing complex on the south end of downtown. His intent was to encourage whites to move back into the city and invest. It worked, but it comes at a price. They cracked down on water utilities and property taxes (things that normally, if you were behind, you could catch up) with the pure intent of forcing as many people as possible out of areas that have been blighted for decades. Suddenly, there were more tax incentives for historical restoration. What goes around may indeed come around, but if you can afford to reposition yourself, it’s still those who can’t afford to paying the price.

  8. RCHOUDH wrote:

    White flight to the suburbs is already pretty well known. And I too am glad to hear that the environmentally damaging setup of suburban neighborhoods is giving so many aging baby boomers trouble in simply getting around. This new economic crisis has also highlighted the problematic setup of these neighborhoods where people who can no longer afford a car cry over the long commutes they have to take out of their suburbs to go to work. Like someone else already mentioned above I do worry however about the increase in gentrified urban neighborhoods however due to whites returning to the city. If low income minorities are pushed out into the suburbs, they’ll be worse off than in the cities due to having trouble simply getting around everywhere unless states wise up and build transportation infrastructure for the suburbs.

  9. bdsista wrote:

    Living in Columbia,MD based on the New Town concept created by the late James Rouse. Where the tenets of the city were to promote racial harmony and honor the environment, I see the issues having lived in other cities, but we have a pretty good model here for what is workable. Every village has a village center and is composed of neighborhoods that have a neighborhood center and a pool. You do need a car here, but there is affordable housing (of a sort) near the village centers which have grocery stores, banks, ethnic eateries, and other businesses. Our bus service is lamentable, but there are several senior centers and high rises and living communities (which are pretty high). The Starbucks is in Safeway, but here everyone for over 25 years goes to the Bagel Bin for coffee and meeting your neighbors. I personally, make mine at home and subscribe to the paper. My only concern is that my house is a colonial and I want to move a rancher someday. Like the Levitt home my parents own…..(in Columbia)

  10. chicagorose wrote:

    I would simply never wish the troubles that an aging senior citizen without the resources to be properly shuttled around, without access to affordable groceries, healthcare, or ability to maintain either property taxes or even simple home repairs, on anyone, no matter what their racist rhetoric may have been in moving to the suburbs. I would put them in the same category as anyone else disadvantaged. My anger lies with pushing people out of neighborhoods that have spent their entire lives there to make room for someone else’s perceived notion of *cleaning up* the area, when those same people who grew up in the suburbs suddenly decide they want to reclaim it or *take it back*. The methods used to accomplish those goals isn’t pretty. So regardless of if a few baby boomers might be finally paying the ultimate price for putting too much stock into their perceived whiteness, economically disadvantaged minorities are still being herded like cattle into the places society deems them fit to live. Nothing’s changed but the scenery here.

  11. Ailurophile wrote:

    And then there’s the safety factor – posters have mentioned aging people who don’t drive. Believe me, there are far more people out there who shouldn’t be driving but still are. No one can or will step in and take the car keys; the senior has no other way to get around and so elects to keep his or her car and be a road hazard.

  12. lunanoire wrote:

    Out of curiosity, what was the original housing plan for these suburbanites? Were they to age in place? Move in w/ their kids? Go to an assisted living facility? Many people for a long time have said that suburban living is not sustainable for many reasons, including energy costs. Suburban living doesn’t work well for the aged either.

    On a side note, HUD Secretary Donovan mentioned pairing up w/ the Dept of Ed to improve schools to promote community development in a speech Friday. I wonder if the assumption that middle class families choose neighborhoods based on schools is a major factor in choosing where to live, or only one of many factors.