20 December 2010
As predicted ... developers dropping age restrictions to keep sales alive
ctnow.com/business/hc-age-restricted-communities-20101211,0,1607482.story
Struggling 'Active Adult' Developments Drop Age Restrictions
By KENNETH R. GOSSELIN, kgosselin@courant.com
The Hartford Courant
December 13, 2010
In the 1990s, towns across Connecticut enthusiastically approved plans to build housing developments restricted to adults 55 and over, attracted by the idea of solid buyers who would pay their taxes and be active in civic affairs but not add children to school systems.
For retirees, it was a chance to stay in the same towns where they had lived for years.
The number of these "active adult" communities in the state mushroomed — now at 200, by one estimate, representing thousands of single-family houses and condominiums. It worked well for many: Developments flourished and sold out.
But as the housing recession deepened, a growing number of the developments were left unfinished. Some developers have fallen into bankruptcy, others are struggling and looking for a way out.
Now, they've found one.
Following a trend that has unfolded in the past year elsewhere in the country, at least three partly completed "active adult" projects in Greater Hartford — two in Ellington and one in Tolland — have won local approval to drop the age restriction.
In Tolland, Belvedere Ridge provides the most striking example of the slowdown: Envisioned as a community of 66 homes, just two have sold since 2006.
Each of the three developers, including a bank that aims to sell the property to a new builder, are hoping the change will spur sales in a still-weak housing market.
While the conversions are likely to ease financial pressures on developers, they have the potential to spark controversy because the homes were specially approved under the condition that they be only for people over 55. So far, there hasn't been any organized opposition to the change, but some people are raising concerns about what the conversions mean for the future of housing for a fast-growing segment of the population.
Colin Milner, founder of the International Council on Active Aging, said a spate of conversions could reduce the backlog of housing for 55 and over — making it tougher for people that age to find housing in the future. It also could push up the prices buyers may have to pay, he said.
"Will older adults have the adequate number of communities that they will need?" asked Milner, who has been consulted by the White House on issues involving aging. "It's still up in the air."
A Jump Start?
Among the three developments in Tolland and Ellington, 243 housing units — a mix of single-family houses and townhouses — were envisioned. So far, just 17 have been sold.
There are early signs, however, that the conversions are likely to jump start stalled projects.
At Windermere Village in Ellington, the developer, who broke ground in early 2008, went 18 months without a single offer. At most there might be three people a week coming to take peek at a development, where eight units have been sold out of 123 that were planned.
"I felt like I was one of those stores in New York and people were just window shopping," said William H. Coons Jr., the project's developer.
Since the age restriction was dropped, as of Sept. 1, two buyers — a couple in their 40s and one in their 20s with a young child — have placed deposits on single-family houses, Coons said.
Coons and other developers say the nature of the developments, while now allowing children, won't change radically because the homes remain modest, typically under 2,500 square feet with 2 or 3 bedrooms and small yards.Nevertheless, the conversions are ruffling some neighbors who thought the developments would remain age-restricted.
When Christine Lacas and her husband built a new home in Tolland in 2007, she was told the nearby Belvedere Ridge was 55 and over. She was relieved to know there would be no children because there was a wooded area on her property with a stream that she can't easily see from her house.
"We were told this was age restricted and we expected it to remain that way," Lacas said. "I don't want my backyard to be a recreation area for kids in the upper part of that development."
'Everything Just Stopped'
When Estelle Williamson moved into Center Village in Ellington with her husband, John, three years ago, she was the second resident of the 55-and-older community. Then another single-family house went up and then another.
"We thought, 'This place is really starting to build up,'" Williamson said. "Then, it stopped. Everything just stopped."
The lawn of Williamson's Cape Cod-style house is well-maintained, and her home is decorated for the holidays with lights and festive globes of evergreen hanging in the front porch. But all around her are vacant fields.
She fetches a three-ring binder from a closet and opens it on her dining room table. She points to a map showing the 49 houses and a couple of duplexes that were supposed to be constructed. So far, just five houses and a duplex have been sold.
In 2009, Rockville Bank took over the property in a foreclosure from the original developer. The bank said opening the development to a larger segment of buyers made sense in a weak housing market. The bank says it is now in advanced negotiations with possible new owners and could reach an agreement early next year.
Williamson, whose husband died earlier this year, said she and her neighbors didn't oppose the conversion. She says she raised a large family, and doesn't mind that there might be children in the development. What is more important, she said, is getting the development moving again.
The roads in Center Village haven't been accepted by the town. The handful of homeowners have to share costs that should have been spread out among more property owners. Street lighting still needs to be installed.
"It's very dark around here at night," Williamson said. "I would like to see it finished."
Williamson, who paid $350,000 for her home in 2007, knows the house has lost value. A stalled development doesn't attract buyers and lenders are reluctant to finance purchases under such conditions.
The New Normal
The flow of buyers to 55 and over communities slowed to trickle in 2008, as home sales weakened dramatically and property values took a hit.
"It is difficult to sell today, and therefore moves to retirement communities have slowed down," said Susan M. Wachter, professor of real estate and finance at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania. "Potential retirees whose homes are 'underwater,' with mortgages greater than home values make it difficult to sell."
Retirement savings also have been eroded in the financial services meltdown in recent years, forcing some to work longer than expected.
"Staying in place is the new normal," Wachter said.
Wachter said the move to convert to 55-and-over communities could gain momentum, especially if the recovery of the housing market is slow.
Towns in Connecticut didn't quickly embrace the change. In Ellington, town zoning officials initially rebuffed efforts to drop the age restriction, preferring to let the market work itself out, according to town planner Rob Phillips.
But as Center Village's developer fell into bankruptcy and owners there and in Windermere Village lined up to support the change, zoning officials softened their stance. The modest size of the homes, many of them with two bedrooms, are not conducive to raising large families — so the change wouldn't significantly alter what made the 55 and over restriction attractive to start with, Phillips said.
In addition, at Windermere Village, the developer agreed to set aside 20 percent of the units for "workforce" housing to be priced at $250,000.
Knocking on the Door
Not everyone is willing to pull back from the 55 and over market, however.
In Berlin, a developer backed by a group of private investors purchased the Beckley Farms development in August from Webster Bank, which had foreclosed on the project.
The $50 million development is expected to have 156 units in all, including 54 townhouses, to be built in five phases. The project has 22 single-family houses that were built and sold before the previous developer ran into trouble. There also are eight houses that were up and sided, but not finished on the inside.
Jeff Respler, the project's managing partner, said the new owners already have invested $500,000 in improvements. He said the community's feels like it is out in the country, but is still close to shopping and restaurants on the Berlin Turnpike.
"We had people coming knocking on the front door of our sales office, asking for more information," Respler said. "There's definitely a market out there."
But in Tolland, developer Lenard Thylan of New York-based Tomlen LLC said he is looking for a fresh start at Belvedere Ridge. The development also has a new name: Somerset Woods.
Thylan said he believes that the "active adult" market has suffered from overbuilding — and that the niche of the age restriction just shut out too many potential buyers.
"The change is very simple," Thylan said. "Real estate is predicated on market concerns. The market needed to be expanded. It made more sense, if we had the ability to sell to everyone."
Copyright © 2010, The Hartford Courant
Struggling 'Active Adult' Developments Drop Age Restrictions
By KENNETH R. GOSSELIN, kgosselin@courant.com
The Hartford Courant
December 13, 2010
In the 1990s, towns across Connecticut enthusiastically approved plans to build housing developments restricted to adults 55 and over, attracted by the idea of solid buyers who would pay their taxes and be active in civic affairs but not add children to school systems.
For retirees, it was a chance to stay in the same towns where they had lived for years.
The number of these "active adult" communities in the state mushroomed — now at 200, by one estimate, representing thousands of single-family houses and condominiums. It worked well for many: Developments flourished and sold out.
But as the housing recession deepened, a growing number of the developments were left unfinished. Some developers have fallen into bankruptcy, others are struggling and looking for a way out.
Now, they've found one.
Following a trend that has unfolded in the past year elsewhere in the country, at least three partly completed "active adult" projects in Greater Hartford — two in Ellington and one in Tolland — have won local approval to drop the age restriction.
In Tolland, Belvedere Ridge provides the most striking example of the slowdown: Envisioned as a community of 66 homes, just two have sold since 2006.
Each of the three developers, including a bank that aims to sell the property to a new builder, are hoping the change will spur sales in a still-weak housing market.
While the conversions are likely to ease financial pressures on developers, they have the potential to spark controversy because the homes were specially approved under the condition that they be only for people over 55. So far, there hasn't been any organized opposition to the change, but some people are raising concerns about what the conversions mean for the future of housing for a fast-growing segment of the population.
Colin Milner, founder of the International Council on Active Aging, said a spate of conversions could reduce the backlog of housing for 55 and over — making it tougher for people that age to find housing in the future. It also could push up the prices buyers may have to pay, he said.
"Will older adults have the adequate number of communities that they will need?" asked Milner, who has been consulted by the White House on issues involving aging. "It's still up in the air."
A Jump Start?
Among the three developments in Tolland and Ellington, 243 housing units — a mix of single-family houses and townhouses — were envisioned. So far, just 17 have been sold.
There are early signs, however, that the conversions are likely to jump start stalled projects.
At Windermere Village in Ellington, the developer, who broke ground in early 2008, went 18 months without a single offer. At most there might be three people a week coming to take peek at a development, where eight units have been sold out of 123 that were planned.
"I felt like I was one of those stores in New York and people were just window shopping," said William H. Coons Jr., the project's developer.
Since the age restriction was dropped, as of Sept. 1, two buyers — a couple in their 40s and one in their 20s with a young child — have placed deposits on single-family houses, Coons said.
Coons and other developers say the nature of the developments, while now allowing children, won't change radically because the homes remain modest, typically under 2,500 square feet with 2 or 3 bedrooms and small yards.Nevertheless, the conversions are ruffling some neighbors who thought the developments would remain age-restricted.
When Christine Lacas and her husband built a new home in Tolland in 2007, she was told the nearby Belvedere Ridge was 55 and over. She was relieved to know there would be no children because there was a wooded area on her property with a stream that she can't easily see from her house.
"We were told this was age restricted and we expected it to remain that way," Lacas said. "I don't want my backyard to be a recreation area for kids in the upper part of that development."
'Everything Just Stopped'
When Estelle Williamson moved into Center Village in Ellington with her husband, John, three years ago, she was the second resident of the 55-and-older community. Then another single-family house went up and then another.
"We thought, 'This place is really starting to build up,'" Williamson said. "Then, it stopped. Everything just stopped."
The lawn of Williamson's Cape Cod-style house is well-maintained, and her home is decorated for the holidays with lights and festive globes of evergreen hanging in the front porch. But all around her are vacant fields.
She fetches a three-ring binder from a closet and opens it on her dining room table. She points to a map showing the 49 houses and a couple of duplexes that were supposed to be constructed. So far, just five houses and a duplex have been sold.
In 2009, Rockville Bank took over the property in a foreclosure from the original developer. The bank said opening the development to a larger segment of buyers made sense in a weak housing market. The bank says it is now in advanced negotiations with possible new owners and could reach an agreement early next year.
Williamson, whose husband died earlier this year, said she and her neighbors didn't oppose the conversion. She says she raised a large family, and doesn't mind that there might be children in the development. What is more important, she said, is getting the development moving again.
The roads in Center Village haven't been accepted by the town. The handful of homeowners have to share costs that should have been spread out among more property owners. Street lighting still needs to be installed.
"It's very dark around here at night," Williamson said. "I would like to see it finished."
Williamson, who paid $350,000 for her home in 2007, knows the house has lost value. A stalled development doesn't attract buyers and lenders are reluctant to finance purchases under such conditions.
The New Normal
The flow of buyers to 55 and over communities slowed to trickle in 2008, as home sales weakened dramatically and property values took a hit.
"It is difficult to sell today, and therefore moves to retirement communities have slowed down," said Susan M. Wachter, professor of real estate and finance at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania. "Potential retirees whose homes are 'underwater,' with mortgages greater than home values make it difficult to sell."
Retirement savings also have been eroded in the financial services meltdown in recent years, forcing some to work longer than expected.
"Staying in place is the new normal," Wachter said.
Wachter said the move to convert to 55-and-over communities could gain momentum, especially if the recovery of the housing market is slow.
Towns in Connecticut didn't quickly embrace the change. In Ellington, town zoning officials initially rebuffed efforts to drop the age restriction, preferring to let the market work itself out, according to town planner Rob Phillips.
But as Center Village's developer fell into bankruptcy and owners there and in Windermere Village lined up to support the change, zoning officials softened their stance. The modest size of the homes, many of them with two bedrooms, are not conducive to raising large families — so the change wouldn't significantly alter what made the 55 and over restriction attractive to start with, Phillips said.
In addition, at Windermere Village, the developer agreed to set aside 20 percent of the units for "workforce" housing to be priced at $250,000.
Knocking on the Door
Not everyone is willing to pull back from the 55 and over market, however.
In Berlin, a developer backed by a group of private investors purchased the Beckley Farms development in August from Webster Bank, which had foreclosed on the project.
The $50 million development is expected to have 156 units in all, including 54 townhouses, to be built in five phases. The project has 22 single-family houses that were built and sold before the previous developer ran into trouble. There also are eight houses that were up and sided, but not finished on the inside.
Jeff Respler, the project's managing partner, said the new owners already have invested $500,000 in improvements. He said the community's feels like it is out in the country, but is still close to shopping and restaurants on the Berlin Turnpike.
"We had people coming knocking on the front door of our sales office, asking for more information," Respler said. "There's definitely a market out there."
But in Tolland, developer Lenard Thylan of New York-based Tomlen LLC said he is looking for a fresh start at Belvedere Ridge. The development also has a new name: Somerset Woods.
Thylan said he believes that the "active adult" market has suffered from overbuilding — and that the niche of the age restriction just shut out too many potential buyers.
"The change is very simple," Thylan said. "Real estate is predicated on market concerns. The market needed to be expanded. It made more sense, if we had the ability to sell to everyone."
Copyright © 2010, The Hartford Courant
06 November 2010
Billionaire's son charged with poaching in Montana
The Villages' mysterious billionaire owner's son is charged with a felony....
15 October 2010
Letter from a reader; My response
Dear Andrew:
I read your book, "Leisureville" twice, as we are considering moving there. There are a couple misconceptions that I would like to clear up. First of all, when I was your age, I also thought active retirement communities were ridiculous and my grown children actually remember me saying that. I am not against children. I do not mind having children around, and I would never consider moving if my children didn't relocate after they graduated from college and we are moving simply to live closer to them. If we move into a development, most of the families would be young and their conversations would be about PTA and such. I always had a problem with getting old, and although I love children (I was a teacher!), I feel older when I'm the oldest person in the neighborhood. In the Villages, or anywhere else for 55+ residents, I wouldn't feel so old, since I would be among my peers. Again, your book insinuated that we are moving away from our children. My son relocated from NJ to Florida, and our primary reason for moving is to be near him and after he's married, to be near our grandchildren. Since we have to move to be closer to him, it just makes sense to live someplace that has activities, so my husband doesn't watch TV all day. By being active, it keeps you young. Watching TV, or other inactive activity just makes you old much too quickly. Believe me, I have seen this with our parents.
I read your book because until recently, we didn't consider an active community, and Leisureville happens to be about the area we plan on moving to. My husband and I are very happily married for 34 years. Are the activities that go on in Katie Belle's really as bad as the book implies? I don't want to live in an atmosphere like that. Yet, my husband and I like to go out to dinner. We don't want to deal with people like Mr. Midnight. In general, is it like any other place, or is it a place for perverted old people?
Have you done any follow-ups to Leisureville? I'd definitely read them if you did.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
X
(kept anonymous by me to protect privacy of reader)
------
My Response:
Dear X,
My point in the book is that these communities are not "bad" per se, but rather that they are a symptom of a societal / generational breakdown. Lean times are ahead and I don't think segregation (voluntary or otherwise) is going to lend itself to cooperative sharing when the pie continues to shrink. Regardless, I suspect you'll rather enjoy life in The Villages. Most people there adore it. It is not a "perverted" place in any way, so there's nothing to fear in that way. And as judgmental as you sound about Mr. Midnight, he's actually a very decent guy, not some sort of ass-pincher. He's well liked and for good reason.
Keep in mind that The Villages is extremely conservative Republican for the most part; not particularly intellectual; there is very little diversity -- conformity is the rule, not the exception; there are lots of rules; and one family "governs" the place and they don't like dissent. And while the place itself is a playground paradise for active seniors, it's surrounded by sprawl and rural Floridians with a very different culture. If none of that is a problem, then I suspect you'll like it there very much. It's huge and there's lots to do. People make friends very quickly. But you won't hear from those who don't like it -- they've already left. Also keep in mind that parents who move to be near their children in today's world are often disappointed because their children often move again for jobs when necessary. Like I said, I don't see these communities as "the problem"; merely a symptom.
Best wishes,
Andrew
I read your book, "Leisureville" twice, as we are considering moving there. There are a couple misconceptions that I would like to clear up. First of all, when I was your age, I also thought active retirement communities were ridiculous and my grown children actually remember me saying that. I am not against children. I do not mind having children around, and I would never consider moving if my children didn't relocate after they graduated from college and we are moving simply to live closer to them. If we move into a development, most of the families would be young and their conversations would be about PTA and such. I always had a problem with getting old, and although I love children (I was a teacher!), I feel older when I'm the oldest person in the neighborhood. In the Villages, or anywhere else for 55+ residents, I wouldn't feel so old, since I would be among my peers. Again, your book insinuated that we are moving away from our children. My son relocated from NJ to Florida, and our primary reason for moving is to be near him and after he's married, to be near our grandchildren. Since we have to move to be closer to him, it just makes sense to live someplace that has activities, so my husband doesn't watch TV all day. By being active, it keeps you young. Watching TV, or other inactive activity just makes you old much too quickly. Believe me, I have seen this with our parents.
I read your book because until recently, we didn't consider an active community, and Leisureville happens to be about the area we plan on moving to. My husband and I are very happily married for 34 years. Are the activities that go on in Katie Belle's really as bad as the book implies? I don't want to live in an atmosphere like that. Yet, my husband and I like to go out to dinner. We don't want to deal with people like Mr. Midnight. In general, is it like any other place, or is it a place for perverted old people?
Have you done any follow-ups to Leisureville? I'd definitely read them if you did.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
X
(kept anonymous by me to protect privacy of reader)
------
My Response:
Dear X,
My point in the book is that these communities are not "bad" per se, but rather that they are a symptom of a societal / generational breakdown. Lean times are ahead and I don't think segregation (voluntary or otherwise) is going to lend itself to cooperative sharing when the pie continues to shrink. Regardless, I suspect you'll rather enjoy life in The Villages. Most people there adore it. It is not a "perverted" place in any way, so there's nothing to fear in that way. And as judgmental as you sound about Mr. Midnight, he's actually a very decent guy, not some sort of ass-pincher. He's well liked and for good reason.
Keep in mind that The Villages is extremely conservative Republican for the most part; not particularly intellectual; there is very little diversity -- conformity is the rule, not the exception; there are lots of rules; and one family "governs" the place and they don't like dissent. And while the place itself is a playground paradise for active seniors, it's surrounded by sprawl and rural Floridians with a very different culture. If none of that is a problem, then I suspect you'll like it there very much. It's huge and there's lots to do. People make friends very quickly. But you won't hear from those who don't like it -- they've already left. Also keep in mind that parents who move to be near their children in today's world are often disappointed because their children often move again for jobs when necessary. Like I said, I don't see these communities as "the problem"; merely a symptom.
Best wishes,
Andrew
11 October 2010
Reinventing our suburbs -- WSJ
LIFE & STYLEOCTOBER 9, 2010
How SoHo Can Save the Suburbs
Smart 'edge cities' are turning their shuttered malls and aging office parks into hip hotspots
By RICHARD FLORIDA
In Lakewood, Colo., a long-shuttered mall is being rebuilt into a 22-block area with parks, bus lines, stores and 1,300 new households. Tysons Corner, Va., is undergoing a full transformation from an office park to a walkable, livable community. And officials in Ferndale, Mich., are promoting the arts scene and building affordable housing in an attempt to revitalize the small city outside Detroit. Remaking America's sprawling suburbs, with their enormous footprints, shoddy construction, hastily built infrastructure and dying malls, is shaping up to be the biggest urban revitalization challenge of modern times—far larger in scale, scope and cost than the revitalization of our inner cities.
Just a couple of decades ago, the suburbs were the very image of the American Dream, with their sprawling, large-lot homes and expansive lawns. Suburban malls, industrial parks and office campuses accounted for a growing percentage of the nation's economic output. Planners talked about "edge cities"—satellite centers where people could live, work and shop without ever having to set foot in major cities.
With millions of American homes now "underwater" or in foreclosure, the suburbs and exurbs have taken some of the most visible hits from the great recession. In a stunning reversal, big cities like Boston, Chicago and San Francisco have become talent magnets, drawing ambitious people, empty-nesters, young families and even a growing number of offices back to their downtown cores. As inner-city neighborhoods gentrify, blight and intransigent poverty are moving out to the suburbs. A Brookings Institution study released this week found that the number of poor people in the suburbs has grown by 37.4% since 2000, compared with 16.7% in cities.
The suburbs that have continued to prosper during the downturn share many attributes with the best urban neighborhoods: walkability, vibrant street life, density and diversity. The clustering of people and firms is a basic engine of modern economic life. When interesting people encounter each other, they spark new ideas and accelerate the formation of new enterprises. Renewing the suburbs will require retrofitting them for these new ways of living and working.
Even before the recession, our changing demography had begun to alter the texture of suburban life in favor of denser, more walkable mixed-use communities. The average age of marriage has been rising, households have gotten smaller, and home-buyers—surprising numbers of them single women—are looking for smaller houses closer in, with access to parks and cultural amenities.
Though most suburbanites are happy with where they live, many are unhappy with how much time they have to spend in their cars. A 2002 study found that more than half of Americans would prefer to walk more and drive less. Commuting by car is time-consuming and expensive, and according to research by the Nobel Prize-winning economist Daniel Kahneman, it is also one of life's least enjoyable activities. Most suburbanites don't want to move to the city; they want the best aspects of city life to come to them.
Walkable suburbs are some of America's best places to live, and they provide their sprawling, spread-out siblings with a model for renewal. Relatively dense commercial districts, with shops, restaurants and movie theaters, as well as a wide variety of housing types, have always been a feature of the older suburbs that grew up along the streetcar lines of big metro areas. A 2007 study by Christopher Leinberger found more than 150 walkable towns in America's 30 largest metro regions—places like Hoboken, Montclair and Princeton, N.J.; Stamford and Greenwich, Conn.; Brookline, Mass.; Bryn Mawr, Pa.; and Royal Oak and Birmingham, Mich. Newer versions of walkable suburbs can be found in regions that developed later, like Palo Alto, Calif.; Boulder, Colo.; Coral Gables, Fla.; Decatur, Ga.; and Clayton, Mo.
These are the places where Americans are clamoring to live and where housing prices have held up even in the face of one of the greatest real-estate collapses in modern memory. More than that, as my colleague Charlotta Mellander and I found when we looked into the statistics, the U.S. metro areas with walkable suburbs have greater economic output and higher incomes, more highly educated people, and more high-tech industries, to say nothing of higher levels of happiness.
Walk This Way
The most successful walkable suburbs in the U.S., ranked by education levels, per capita income and travel time to work.
1. Bethesda, Md.
2. Princeton Township, N.J.
3. Highland Park, Texas
4. Evanston, Ill.
5. Birmingham, Mich.
6. Coral Gables, Fla.
7. Winter Park, Fla.
8. Menlo Park, Calif.
9. Lake Forest, Ill.
10. Kirkland, Wash.
Sources: Martin Prosperity Institute, Christopher Leinberger, U.S. Census Bureau
Of course, not all of America's suburbs have the option of developing compact cores along streetcar lines or transit, and not all are filled with wonderful old housing stock that is ripe for upgrading. Many are relatively characterless places, with spread-out working class populations living in cookie-cutter houses on large lots and commuting long distances to work. These suburbs have to rebuild from the bottom up.
Languishing older malls are a good place to start. In Phoenix, three abandoned strip malls clustered around one corner have been converted into a restaurant, an upscale grocery, a chic bakery and a cocktail bar. It's called La Grande Orange, and it has become a huge attraction, for both customers and local home-buyers. National Harbor, a mix of hotels, residential units, marinas, parks, stores and indoor and outdoor entertainment venues, is being built on the footings of two previous failed projects in Prince George's County, Md. When completed, it will extend along a mile and a quarter of the Potomac. Outside Minneapolis, the parking lot that surrounded a dead shopping center built on landfill was turned back into wetlands—which in turn attracted new "lakefront" townhome development.
Perhaps the biggest retrofit of all is happening in Tysons Corner, Va., the virtual archetype of an auto-dependent, sprawling edge city. Located near the junctions of three major highways, it boasts 25 million square feet of office space and four million square feet of retail space. Decades ago developers hailed it as the wave of the future—one of hundreds of new satellite centers that would render our old downtown commercial centers obsolete. But Tysons Corner has lately been losing out. Its perpetual traffic gridlock and its lack of human energy have caused home-buyers to choose other places. Some companies that were headquartered there have even moved back into the District of Columbia.
Now developers and landowners are seeking to make it more walkable, with a more integrated mix of uses. In June, the county's Board of Supervisors adopted a comprehensive plan that would transform Tysons Corner into a "24-hour urban center where people live, work and play." Its hallmarks will be green construction, access to public transportation and abundant public amenities, like parks and bicycle trails—something that sounds very much like a real city.
There are countless other opportunities for reclamation, all across America, as Ellen Dunham-Jones and June Williamson document in their 2008 book, "Retrofitting Suburbia." Under-used golf courses can be transformed into parks and nature sanctuaries; abandoned car dealerships can be landscaped and developed as new, mixed-use neighborhoods. Developers can cut streets through formerly walled-off corporate campuses and add restaurants, stores and public spaces.
Historically, America's economic growth has hinged on its ability to create new development patterns—economic landscapes that simultaneously expand space and intensify our use of it. The rebound after the panic and long depression of 1873 was based on the transition to an urban-industrial economy organized around great cities and their early streetcar suburbs. Our recovery from the Great Depression saw the rise of massive metropolitan complexes of cities and suburbs. Today the challenge is to remake our suburbs, to turn them into more vibrant, livable, people-friendly communities and, in doing so, to make them engines of innovation and productivity.
—Richard Florida is director of the Martin Prosperity Institute at the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management and the author of "The Rise of the Creative Class" and "The Great Reset."
Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
How SoHo Can Save the Suburbs
Smart 'edge cities' are turning their shuttered malls and aging office parks into hip hotspots
By RICHARD FLORIDA
In Lakewood, Colo., a long-shuttered mall is being rebuilt into a 22-block area with parks, bus lines, stores and 1,300 new households. Tysons Corner, Va., is undergoing a full transformation from an office park to a walkable, livable community. And officials in Ferndale, Mich., are promoting the arts scene and building affordable housing in an attempt to revitalize the small city outside Detroit. Remaking America's sprawling suburbs, with their enormous footprints, shoddy construction, hastily built infrastructure and dying malls, is shaping up to be the biggest urban revitalization challenge of modern times—far larger in scale, scope and cost than the revitalization of our inner cities.
Just a couple of decades ago, the suburbs were the very image of the American Dream, with their sprawling, large-lot homes and expansive lawns. Suburban malls, industrial parks and office campuses accounted for a growing percentage of the nation's economic output. Planners talked about "edge cities"—satellite centers where people could live, work and shop without ever having to set foot in major cities.
With millions of American homes now "underwater" or in foreclosure, the suburbs and exurbs have taken some of the most visible hits from the great recession. In a stunning reversal, big cities like Boston, Chicago and San Francisco have become talent magnets, drawing ambitious people, empty-nesters, young families and even a growing number of offices back to their downtown cores. As inner-city neighborhoods gentrify, blight and intransigent poverty are moving out to the suburbs. A Brookings Institution study released this week found that the number of poor people in the suburbs has grown by 37.4% since 2000, compared with 16.7% in cities.
The suburbs that have continued to prosper during the downturn share many attributes with the best urban neighborhoods: walkability, vibrant street life, density and diversity. The clustering of people and firms is a basic engine of modern economic life. When interesting people encounter each other, they spark new ideas and accelerate the formation of new enterprises. Renewing the suburbs will require retrofitting them for these new ways of living and working.
Even before the recession, our changing demography had begun to alter the texture of suburban life in favor of denser, more walkable mixed-use communities. The average age of marriage has been rising, households have gotten smaller, and home-buyers—surprising numbers of them single women—are looking for smaller houses closer in, with access to parks and cultural amenities.
Though most suburbanites are happy with where they live, many are unhappy with how much time they have to spend in their cars. A 2002 study found that more than half of Americans would prefer to walk more and drive less. Commuting by car is time-consuming and expensive, and according to research by the Nobel Prize-winning economist Daniel Kahneman, it is also one of life's least enjoyable activities. Most suburbanites don't want to move to the city; they want the best aspects of city life to come to them.
Walkable suburbs are some of America's best places to live, and they provide their sprawling, spread-out siblings with a model for renewal. Relatively dense commercial districts, with shops, restaurants and movie theaters, as well as a wide variety of housing types, have always been a feature of the older suburbs that grew up along the streetcar lines of big metro areas. A 2007 study by Christopher Leinberger found more than 150 walkable towns in America's 30 largest metro regions—places like Hoboken, Montclair and Princeton, N.J.; Stamford and Greenwich, Conn.; Brookline, Mass.; Bryn Mawr, Pa.; and Royal Oak and Birmingham, Mich. Newer versions of walkable suburbs can be found in regions that developed later, like Palo Alto, Calif.; Boulder, Colo.; Coral Gables, Fla.; Decatur, Ga.; and Clayton, Mo.
These are the places where Americans are clamoring to live and where housing prices have held up even in the face of one of the greatest real-estate collapses in modern memory. More than that, as my colleague Charlotta Mellander and I found when we looked into the statistics, the U.S. metro areas with walkable suburbs have greater economic output and higher incomes, more highly educated people, and more high-tech industries, to say nothing of higher levels of happiness.
Walk This Way
The most successful walkable suburbs in the U.S., ranked by education levels, per capita income and travel time to work.
1. Bethesda, Md.
2. Princeton Township, N.J.
3. Highland Park, Texas
4. Evanston, Ill.
5. Birmingham, Mich.
6. Coral Gables, Fla.
7. Winter Park, Fla.
8. Menlo Park, Calif.
9. Lake Forest, Ill.
10. Kirkland, Wash.
Sources: Martin Prosperity Institute, Christopher Leinberger, U.S. Census Bureau
Of course, not all of America's suburbs have the option of developing compact cores along streetcar lines or transit, and not all are filled with wonderful old housing stock that is ripe for upgrading. Many are relatively characterless places, with spread-out working class populations living in cookie-cutter houses on large lots and commuting long distances to work. These suburbs have to rebuild from the bottom up.
Languishing older malls are a good place to start. In Phoenix, three abandoned strip malls clustered around one corner have been converted into a restaurant, an upscale grocery, a chic bakery and a cocktail bar. It's called La Grande Orange, and it has become a huge attraction, for both customers and local home-buyers. National Harbor, a mix of hotels, residential units, marinas, parks, stores and indoor and outdoor entertainment venues, is being built on the footings of two previous failed projects in Prince George's County, Md. When completed, it will extend along a mile and a quarter of the Potomac. Outside Minneapolis, the parking lot that surrounded a dead shopping center built on landfill was turned back into wetlands—which in turn attracted new "lakefront" townhome development.
Perhaps the biggest retrofit of all is happening in Tysons Corner, Va., the virtual archetype of an auto-dependent, sprawling edge city. Located near the junctions of three major highways, it boasts 25 million square feet of office space and four million square feet of retail space. Decades ago developers hailed it as the wave of the future—one of hundreds of new satellite centers that would render our old downtown commercial centers obsolete. But Tysons Corner has lately been losing out. Its perpetual traffic gridlock and its lack of human energy have caused home-buyers to choose other places. Some companies that were headquartered there have even moved back into the District of Columbia.
Now developers and landowners are seeking to make it more walkable, with a more integrated mix of uses. In June, the county's Board of Supervisors adopted a comprehensive plan that would transform Tysons Corner into a "24-hour urban center where people live, work and play." Its hallmarks will be green construction, access to public transportation and abundant public amenities, like parks and bicycle trails—something that sounds very much like a real city.
There are countless other opportunities for reclamation, all across America, as Ellen Dunham-Jones and June Williamson document in their 2008 book, "Retrofitting Suburbia." Under-used golf courses can be transformed into parks and nature sanctuaries; abandoned car dealerships can be landscaped and developed as new, mixed-use neighborhoods. Developers can cut streets through formerly walled-off corporate campuses and add restaurants, stores and public spaces.
Historically, America's economic growth has hinged on its ability to create new development patterns—economic landscapes that simultaneously expand space and intensify our use of it. The rebound after the panic and long depression of 1873 was based on the transition to an urban-industrial economy organized around great cities and their early streetcar suburbs. Our recovery from the Great Depression saw the rise of massive metropolitan complexes of cities and suburbs. Today the challenge is to remake our suburbs, to turn them into more vibrant, livable, people-friendly communities and, in doing so, to make them engines of innovation and productivity.
—Richard Florida is director of the Martin Prosperity Institute at the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management and the author of "The Rise of the Creative Class" and "The Great Reset."
Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
06 September 2010
The American Spectator takes on age-segregation
The American Spectator
THE NATION'S PULSE: Active Adult Communities and the 'Grace of Chaos'
By James M. Thunder
On August 10, Colin Mason of the Population Research Institute wrote the essay "Are Children the Enemy of Productivity?" He quoted Frank Cottrell Boyce's article in the Guardian:
There's a belief that to do great work you need tranquility and control, that the pram is cluttering up the hallway; life needs to be neat and tidy. This isn't the case. Tranquility and control provide the best conditions for completing the work you imagined. But surely the real trick is to produce the work that you never imagined. The great creative moments in our history are almost all stories of distraction and daydreaming -- Archimedes in the bath, Einstein dreaming of riding a sunbeam -- of alert minds open to the grace of chaos.
Mason agrees with Boyce that children do not distract us from productivity, but he added that he believes they actually enhance our productivity and enhance our lives generally. Children, he writes, "remind us that the greatest insights in the world were discovered not while ponderously meditating, but while delighting in the simple pleasures and pains of life."
Boyce's and Mason's words reminded me of when I was 42. My wife and I and our daughters, ages 16 to 5, moved to a suburb outside Milwaukee. Our next-door neighbors were a retired veterinarian, Dr. Frank Gentile, and his wife, Irene, both about 80. As it turned out, they knew my sister and her family who lived in the next suburb.
We moved away a few years later. And Frank and Irene moved into an assisted living home and passed on.
But my family does not forget them. I have memories of snowblowing their driveway and sidewalk and watching election returns with them. My daughters recall with great fondness their invitations to eat cookies with them after school in their kitchen. One of my daughters and I and Frank sang in the same church choir.
During these same years, we became family to my sister's widowed father-in-law, Jack Schlosser, who was in his 80s and lived nearby. He came to many events of both my sister's family and my family. And one of his grandchildren lived behind us.
In this past year, I've known a couple of people who have moved into active adult communities. Active adult communities are planned, often gated, residential areas for people ages 55 and up, without children under the age of 18. Our three elderly friends outside Milwaukee could have moved to one of them. If they had, all three of our generations (elderly, middle-aged and children) would have been deprived of fruitful, loving relationships.
The number of active adult communities continues to grow in our country. Why?
Residents are repelled by certain aspects of urban or suburban life: the noises of children and of teenagers, crime, and high property taxes that supported schools. And they are attracted by amenities -- bike and walking paths, golf courses, clubhouses, swimming pools, tennis courts, a full plate of indoor recreational activities. While these same amenities are typically available in urban and suburban communities, active adult communities provide them together and close at hand.
I submit that active adult communities are inimical to a rich human life. While still active, while still mobile, while still employed, the residents have purposefully disengaged from their elders, from teenagers, from children -- except on the specific dates and time and places they select. On the spectrum of what should be regarded as examples of faith-based land use planning and what should not, active adult communities fall on the extreme of "not."
When I was in college, I would return home of course. In church, it would feel quite odd to be among young children, teenagers, middle-aged people and the elderly. At first I was happy to return to campus and be with my same-age peers. Later, it was the campus rather than the church that seemed odd. I started calling college campuses "youth reservations." But at least college campuses have redeeming value. They are devoted to the development of the intellect and the transmission of knowledge. They are populated by people intending to remain no more than four years and then go out and change the world. Residents of active adult communities, on the other hand, could remain 20-plus years, and to what good purpose are they devoted?
There may be value in being a "gun-free" or "tobacco-free" or "drug-free" zone, but where is the value in having grown-ups post "child-free" signs? Where is the value in having them post signs declaring "under-age-55-free zones"?
I submit that the groomed and tranquil landscapes of active adult communities are a blight on our larger communities and our nation.
In utter contrast to this blight is the recent development of one-room portable modules that house elderly persons. They will be placed temporarily on the lot of a caregiver's permanent home. The Commonwealth of Virginia recently passed legislation allowing such siting to supersede local zoning laws. The juxtaposition of permanent and temporary housing structures may not be aesthetically pleasing but, in similar fashion, school districts around the country have sited temporary classrooms next to school buildings for the sake our schoolchildren. Hopefully, these modules for the care of our frail elderly will blossom across the landscape. Virginians have welcomed "the grace of chaos."
James M. Thunder is a Washington, D.C. lawyer who has spoken and published on what he calls "faith-based land use planning."
THE NATION'S PULSE: Active Adult Communities and the 'Grace of Chaos'
By James M. Thunder
On August 10, Colin Mason of the Population Research Institute wrote the essay "Are Children the Enemy of Productivity?" He quoted Frank Cottrell Boyce's article in the Guardian:
There's a belief that to do great work you need tranquility and control, that the pram is cluttering up the hallway; life needs to be neat and tidy. This isn't the case. Tranquility and control provide the best conditions for completing the work you imagined. But surely the real trick is to produce the work that you never imagined. The great creative moments in our history are almost all stories of distraction and daydreaming -- Archimedes in the bath, Einstein dreaming of riding a sunbeam -- of alert minds open to the grace of chaos.
Mason agrees with Boyce that children do not distract us from productivity, but he added that he believes they actually enhance our productivity and enhance our lives generally. Children, he writes, "remind us that the greatest insights in the world were discovered not while ponderously meditating, but while delighting in the simple pleasures and pains of life."
Boyce's and Mason's words reminded me of when I was 42. My wife and I and our daughters, ages 16 to 5, moved to a suburb outside Milwaukee. Our next-door neighbors were a retired veterinarian, Dr. Frank Gentile, and his wife, Irene, both about 80. As it turned out, they knew my sister and her family who lived in the next suburb.
We moved away a few years later. And Frank and Irene moved into an assisted living home and passed on.
But my family does not forget them. I have memories of snowblowing their driveway and sidewalk and watching election returns with them. My daughters recall with great fondness their invitations to eat cookies with them after school in their kitchen. One of my daughters and I and Frank sang in the same church choir.
During these same years, we became family to my sister's widowed father-in-law, Jack Schlosser, who was in his 80s and lived nearby. He came to many events of both my sister's family and my family. And one of his grandchildren lived behind us.
In this past year, I've known a couple of people who have moved into active adult communities. Active adult communities are planned, often gated, residential areas for people ages 55 and up, without children under the age of 18. Our three elderly friends outside Milwaukee could have moved to one of them. If they had, all three of our generations (elderly, middle-aged and children) would have been deprived of fruitful, loving relationships.
The number of active adult communities continues to grow in our country. Why?
Residents are repelled by certain aspects of urban or suburban life: the noises of children and of teenagers, crime, and high property taxes that supported schools. And they are attracted by amenities -- bike and walking paths, golf courses, clubhouses, swimming pools, tennis courts, a full plate of indoor recreational activities. While these same amenities are typically available in urban and suburban communities, active adult communities provide them together and close at hand.
I submit that active adult communities are inimical to a rich human life. While still active, while still mobile, while still employed, the residents have purposefully disengaged from their elders, from teenagers, from children -- except on the specific dates and time and places they select. On the spectrum of what should be regarded as examples of faith-based land use planning and what should not, active adult communities fall on the extreme of "not."
When I was in college, I would return home of course. In church, it would feel quite odd to be among young children, teenagers, middle-aged people and the elderly. At first I was happy to return to campus and be with my same-age peers. Later, it was the campus rather than the church that seemed odd. I started calling college campuses "youth reservations." But at least college campuses have redeeming value. They are devoted to the development of the intellect and the transmission of knowledge. They are populated by people intending to remain no more than four years and then go out and change the world. Residents of active adult communities, on the other hand, could remain 20-plus years, and to what good purpose are they devoted?
There may be value in being a "gun-free" or "tobacco-free" or "drug-free" zone, but where is the value in having grown-ups post "child-free" signs? Where is the value in having them post signs declaring "under-age-55-free zones"?
I submit that the groomed and tranquil landscapes of active adult communities are a blight on our larger communities and our nation.
In utter contrast to this blight is the recent development of one-room portable modules that house elderly persons. They will be placed temporarily on the lot of a caregiver's permanent home. The Commonwealth of Virginia recently passed legislation allowing such siting to supersede local zoning laws. The juxtaposition of permanent and temporary housing structures may not be aesthetically pleasing but, in similar fashion, school districts around the country have sited temporary classrooms next to school buildings for the sake our schoolchildren. Hopefully, these modules for the care of our frail elderly will blossom across the landscape. Virginians have welcomed "the grace of chaos."
James M. Thunder is a Washington, D.C. lawyer who has spoken and published on what he calls "faith-based land use planning."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
