Blog that supports USC Aiken APLS494I South Carolina Politics class taught in Summer Session I, 2007
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Local Government – An Introduction -- Question 5
Question for Courtney T and Erica W. Perhaps the most important demographic trend of the middle and late 1900s was suburbanization. Evaluate the positives and negatives of this movement.
With the invention of the automobile, the interstate, and innovations in banking, home ownership grew with people moving to the periphery of cities. This is how suburbia began. Some say that the impact of suburbanization has been profound and that it segregates race and economic classes. The growth of other existing cities are stunted. Pollution has been another issue since people rely more on their cars. When businesses leave the inner city to relocate, a tax revenue is loss. On the other hand, a positive is that people get to live where they want without the costly expenses. What may seem negative to outsiders, seems positive to those living in the suburbia. It is hard to say what is good and bad without knowing how it really is.
It depends on which class you were in to determine the positives and the negatives. New technology and automobiles were the biggest positive. Technology was also a negative. It presented a challenge and pressures to keep up the new technological innovations. There were also issues with environmental protection, land use regulation, changing demographics, mandates, and devolution of authority, and performance management.
The growing cites and the new business districts did help to decrease the "traditional" lifestyle that some people were used to living. The business district forced people in the outer cities or suburbs. It also helped to create jobs. The also faced some structural issues as far as annexation.
While Erica gave an adequate answer, Courtney summarized the main issues surrounding the creation of suburbia.
People did get what they want -- the American dream -- some green land that ehy could control (the American yard), and space for their children to play, and the ability to choose neighbors by the neighborhood that one moved in to. They also kept the cultural amenities of the nearby city and the jobs that were associated with it, and by moving away and incorporating the suburban community avoid the taxes that are required to maintain the infrastructure of a city.
That is where this dream starts to look selfish. People chose to live with those of their own kind (usually defined by economic class and race) and got to have the benefits of living near a city without having to pay the cost. And this outward movement also began to draw service businesses away and left behind those who could not afford to move out in the city -- inner city neighborhoods deteriorated and had fewer services as property values went down and remaining residents could not afford to pay more in taxes to improve the situation. Cities got into a kind of downward spiral. In addition, there were costs of congested roadways and pollution, mentioned by both Courtney and Erica.
We will see some trends in the reverse direction later when we look at planning (such as "new urbanism" that is based partly on life in downtown Charleston and Beaufort, as well as "smart growth" that stresses walkability and mixed use of land). But these trends are relatively new, while the process of suburbanization have been ongoing for a long time now. In my trip to south Florida last weekend I saw tens of thousands of new homes springing up in new subdivisions that are replacing the drained wetlands of the state.
I am the one on the right! I have been a professor of political science at USCA since 1978. We will use this blog for class discussion and for posting written assignments that I may make. When you post you may do so using the anonymous profile, but please sign your name to all your posts! Posts are shown REVERSE chronological order. The most recent post is at the top. So READ FROM THE BOTTOM UP in the topics shown in the BLOG ARCHIVE above.
3 comments:
With the invention of the automobile, the interstate, and innovations in banking, home ownership grew with people moving to the periphery of cities. This is how suburbia began. Some say that the impact of suburbanization has been profound and that it segregates race and economic classes. The growth of other existing cities are stunted. Pollution has been another issue since people rely more on their cars. When businesses leave the inner city to relocate, a tax revenue is loss. On the other hand, a positive is that people get to live where they want without the costly expenses. What may seem negative to outsiders, seems positive to those living in the suburbia. It is hard to say what is good and bad without knowing how it really is.
It depends on which class you were in to determine the positives and the negatives. New technology and automobiles were the biggest positive. Technology was also a negative. It presented a challenge and pressures to keep up the new technological innovations. There were also issues with environmental protection, land use regulation, changing demographics, mandates, and devolution of authority, and performance management.
The growing cites and the new business districts did help to decrease the "traditional" lifestyle that some people were used to living. The business district forced people in the outer cities or suburbs. It also helped to create jobs. The also faced some structural issues as far as annexation.
Erica Armour
While Erica gave an adequate answer, Courtney summarized the main issues surrounding the creation of suburbia.
People did get what they want -- the American dream -- some green land that ehy could control (the American yard), and space for their children to play, and the ability to choose neighbors by the neighborhood that one moved in to. They also kept the cultural amenities of the nearby city and the jobs that were associated with it, and by moving away and incorporating the suburban community avoid the taxes that are required to maintain the infrastructure of a city.
That is where this dream starts to look selfish. People chose to live with those of their own kind (usually defined by economic class and race) and got to have the benefits of living near a city without having to pay the cost. And this outward movement also began to draw service businesses away and left behind those who could not afford to move out in the city -- inner city neighborhoods deteriorated and had fewer services as property values went down and remaining residents could not afford to pay more in taxes to improve the situation. Cities got into a kind of downward spiral. In addition, there were costs of congested roadways and pollution, mentioned by both Courtney and Erica.
We will see some trends in the reverse direction later when we look at planning (such as "new urbanism" that is based partly on life in downtown Charleston and Beaufort, as well as "smart growth" that stresses walkability and mixed use of land). But these trends are relatively new, while the process of suburbanization have been ongoing for a long time now. In my trip to south Florida last weekend I saw tens of thousands of new homes springing up in new subdivisions that are replacing the drained wetlands of the state.
Bob B
Post a Comment