National Academies Press: OpenBook

Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future (1988)

Chapter: 6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values

« Previous: 5 An Economic Model of Urban Growth
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 108
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 109
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 110
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 112
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 114
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 115
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 116
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 117
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 118
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 119
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 120
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 121
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 122
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 123
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 124
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 125
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 126
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 127
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 128
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 129
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 130
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 131
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 132
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 133
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 134
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 135
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 136
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 137
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 138
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 139
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 140
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 141
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 142
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 143
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 144
Suggested Citation:"6 Growth of U.S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values." National Research Council. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1093.
×
Page 145

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

6 Growth of U. S. Cities and Recent Trends in Urban Real Estate Values JOHN S. ADAMS Urban infrastructure evolves at two geographical scales. At the national scale the physical infrastructure connects our system of urban centers; at the local scale, it supports activity inside each urban area. Activity at the two scales is largely separate but entirely complementary. At the national scale an infrastructure framework of transportation and communication channels has evolved to support production, distribution, and consumption activity, which increasingly has centered on urban areas. Indeed, the design and operation of the infrastructure has fostered the growth of the nation's system of cities while directing its evolution. The building of the infrastructure absorbed huge amounts of private capital investment; in return, it enhanced the productivity of natural and human resources devoted to producing the goods and services that people wanted to buy. At the local scales, urban areas were organized and built up mainly as economic entities to facilitate the collection, processing, and distribution of goods, and the production and distribution of business and personal services. Locally generated public and private finances traditionally were the main sources drawn on to build and maintain much of the local infra- structure (for example, dams, bridges, roads, and utilities). In recent decades the direct costs of new local infrastructure have been paid for from public sources (borrowing, taxes, fees, investment tax credits, tax breaks, etc.) or private sources (equity investments, borrowing). The in- direct costs of such infrastructure, which are often imposed on the rest of the system as a result of premature deterioration, underutilization, or 108

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTA TE VAL UES 109 abandonment of existing infrastructure, are harder to assess but are just as real. This chapter examines the evolution of the transportation and com- munications aspects of the national infrastructure and then explores the dynamics of local infrastructure supply and demand as they relate to changing real estate values and new central city housing construction. In conclusion, questions are raised about what is needed in the way of urban infrastructure, what may not be needed, and who should pay for it. DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATIONAL METROPOLITAN INFRASTRUCTURE Urban growth nationwide can be divided into epochs that reflect the impacts of major technological innovations on the construction of urban infrastructure. The first epoch depended on the wagon and sailing vessels; the second, on steamboats and the early railroad; the third, on long-haul trains made possible by the advent of standard-gauge steel tracks; and the fourth, on autos, trucks, and airplanes powered by the internal combustion engine. The nation's current romance with computers and telecommuni- cations prompts us to wonder about a fifth epoch, but the impact of these innovations on the geography of metropolitan areas is still unclear. During the four epochs, changes in transportation and power generation technologies were strong propellants of population and investment redis- tributions because they altered relative distances between cities and defined the cost of accessibility to raw materials. In addition, they permitted workers and urban economies to specialize and to trade profitably with one another. Other kinds of innovations, such as advances in medicine and public hygiene that increased life expectancies in cities, were also important to growth. But transportation and power innovations were the changes that could bring new sources of raw materials within a city's reach or, alternatively, signal atrophy of a city's industry by increasing the accessibility of a nearby larger, more competitive center. The sail-wagon epoch spanned the first several decades (1790-1830) of U.S. history. Nearly all the largest cities at the beginning of this epoch were ports on the Atlantic Ocean or on rivers emptying into it. But despite their water route connections and a heavy emphasis on trade, these large cities were highly independent of each other and were as much extensions of European economies as they were organizers of their own. For most of the colonial period, Boston, Philadelphia, New York City, and the other ports interacted sparingly, and the land transportation network re- mained primitive in the early national period. The resulting inability to penetrate the interior of the continent with satisfactory low-cost transpor

110 JOHN; S. ADAlklS ration and communication infrastructure delayed the struggle for hinter- lands until the end of the epoch, thereby enabling most Atlantic ports to retain their places in the population size hierarchy. The most important resource of this first epoch and the ensuing "iron horse" epoch (1830-1870) was arable land. Especially in the early 1800s the vast majority of Americans worked in primary industries, most of them as farmers. Hence, cities of rapid growth were closely associated with the nation's westward expansion; as new farmlands and timber areas opened up, cities appeared on the navigable rivers and canals to serve them, and an assortment of steam vessels were developed to carry pas- sengers and cargo. In the 1840s the rising importance of the "iron horse" stimulated demand for iron ore and coal. As a result, boom towns grew up around areas of extraction of those resources as well, largely in the previously settled parts of the nation. Change became more rapid during the iron horse epoch as the struggle for hinterlands began in earnest. The development of regional rail networks extended the influence of rising urban centers deeper into the surrounding agricultural regions. Some Atlantic ports grew at the expense of others, and New York City's growth far outfaced that of its rivals Boston and Philadelphia as it became the nation's first-ranked metropolis. The fastest growing cities during this epoch were the inland ports such as Detroit, Cleveland, Chicago, and St. Louis, which grew at junctures of regional rail networks and long-haul transport. The "steel-rail" epoch (1870-1920) saw the emergence of a national rail transportation system as the standardization of track and cars and the advent of improved steel rails made long-haul trains feasible. The im- provement of the rail network was a strong force in organizing new heavy industries particularly steelmaking- and therefore also stimulated pop- ulation redistribution. The large inland ports that had thrived earlier as commercial centers were now within easy rail access of bituminous coal deposits and the national market, and they soon became industrial centers. Their populations continued to grow, increasing their concentration of the population in the largest centers and thereby continuing a trend that had begun in the iron horse epoch. Although the number of large cities re- mained stable after growing rapidly in the previous epoch, they continued to increase their share of the national population. The steel-rail epoch also witnessed a large increase in the number of medium-sized cities as more places were brought within the national circulation patterns with the ex- pansion and improvement of the transportation and communication infra- structure to accommodate the flows of passengers, commodities, and ~ . intormahon. Most of the steel-rail epoch's new major urban centers appeared around

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTATE VALUES 111 the recently opened agricultural areas of the West; a few others were associated with the deposits of copper in Montana, lead and zinc in Mis- souri, and iron ore on Lake Superior. Boom centers also accompanied exploitation of bituminous coal deposits. The largest group of cities to decline in relative importance during the epoch were concentrated on the Missouri-Mississippi-Ohio river systems, reflecting the rapid decline of steamboat traffic at the hands of the nationally integrated rail network. By the end of the steel-rail epoch, the outline of today's metropolitan system was established. Nevertheless, urban evolution continued in the "auto-air-amenity" epoch (1920-1960s). Cities near the coalfields now declined while those near the oil fields grew with the demands of the automobile, home heating, and industry. An important feature of the new epoch was the relative decline in the labor force of the primary and secondary industries, signaling their diminishing impact on the prosperity of large centers. Employment swung toward the hard-to-mechanize non- basic service activities, which mostly serve local populations, and their rising importance foretold the expanded role of inertia in metropolitan evolution. A rapidly growing national population and an increasingly sophisticated economy now ensured that large metropolitan centers could grow despite reverses in their industrial export sectors. INFRASTRUCTURE LESSONS FROM GEOGRAPHIC HISTORY Behind the steadily increasing proportion of Americans living in met- ropolitan centers lay a more complex picture of metropolitan growth. Each era featured boom and slow-growth centers as well as centers that grew at less extreme rates (these latter centers made up the majority). The growth patterns of individual urban centers were determined in large part by the state of technology and the resultant designation of important resources. With society's adoption of technological innovations, an advantageous location might become disadvantageous, and a specialized urban economy that meant boom in one epoch could spell doom in the next. Many centers prospered in two or more epochs by a combination of aggressive entre- preneurship and fortunate location within the transportation-communi- cation network of the day. Other centers faltered because they were unable to adapt quickly enough to a new technological regime and consequently dropped in ranking in the urban size hierarchy. St. Louis and Pittsburgh, for example, grew quickly during the iron horse epoch but later fell in size relative to many American cities. Even those centers that adjusted to changing conditions grew in different ways from one epoch to the next, as is revealed today in their physical structures. New York City is an old American metropolis that experienced

112 JOHN S. ADAMS a large proportion of its growth during the iron horse and steel-rail epochs, during which it became the nation's largest city and then one of the world's great industrial and financial centers. Chicago boomed in the iron horse epoch and maintained its rank thereafter. Los Angeles, on the other hand, is primarily a product of the auto-air-amenity epoch and has no real counterpart in the vast areas of New York or Chicago that were built up during the earlier eras. It would therefore be unreasonable to assume that Los Angeles will someday "grow up" to be another New York. There are many similarities among American metropolises and the layers of infrastructure that sustain them, but the nature of metropolitan evolution ensures that no single model of growth or structure will apply equally to such diverse centers as New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, and Charleston, West Virginia. Urban policy, therefore, must be flexible enough to accommodate each city's unique characteristics and changing growth patterns. Metropolises with different physical structures, populations, and functions are likely to have different shortcomings as well. Based on our previous example, we can imagine that New York and Los Angeles have significantly different housing needs. They are also dissimilar in their needs for other infrastructure, in the kinds of pollution they suffer, in their physical resource bases, in their employment and unemployment profiles, and in their illegal alien problems. Their governmental structures and their different relationships with state and federal governments further com . . . pllcate comparisons. Moreover, it cannot be assumed that urban policies for the Los Angeles or the New York of today will be appropriate 20 years from now. The history of American urban planning fits largely into the auto-air-a;nenity epoch; consequently, planners have never faced the turmoil that accom- panies the accelerated change in growth patterns between epochs. Urban growth in some respects has been unidirectional within epochs, but it becomes confused as society adopts an important innovation that redefines the locational significance of places within the national transportation- communication infrastructure. A group of urban planners in 1880 might have been fairly successful at outlining growth patterns for the ensuing 20 or 30 years, but how would such a group have fared in 1920, when their experience with the characteristics of a rail-dominated transportation network was on the verge of becoming obsolete? We could derive some basic policy guidelines for individual metro- politan centers by grouping them and finding the problems common to members of each group. For example, metropolises that grew most rapidly in the same epochs and in approximately the same physical environments, that are of the same size, and that have similar employment structures usually have common needs. Because of the many ways in which met

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTA TE VAL UES 113 ropolitan areas differ, however, comprehensive urban policies-whether initiated at the federal, state, or local level-must address unique problems as well. And, as we noted earlier, metropolitan needs change with time. An understanding of these complexities of urban policy is currently of special interest because of indications that metropolitan America is en- tering a new growth epoch. PAYING FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE NEW SERVICE ECONOMY It can be argued that this new metropolitan growth epoch centers on the service industries and on an infrastructure of information handling; that the new jobs will come from the service industries; and that much of the new economic infrastructure will be built around offices, airports, computers, and telecommunications systems. But this limited view focuses merely on transactions and flows through the metropolitan economy and not on the stocks of physical and human capital that make the flows possible. Even after we measure the flows, we cannot be sure whether they mean what we think they mean. Some of what passes for productive economic activity these days looks suspiciously like the transfer of money from one set of pockets to another without the creation of anything of corresponding value. This charge is easy to make but hard to prove. At the moment, we do not have comprehensive economic balance sheets for cities or regions as we do for companies or even families. A family or a firm can usually tell at the end of a year whether it is in better or worse shape than it was a year earlier. Such a determination is harder to make for a city, a region, or a nation. As a consequence, we focus most of our policy attention on flows and on the annual operating statements that report the flows. To a certain extent, we can take the economic "temperature" of a city by looking at its bond rating or at the annual budget of the city government or at the change in the number of jobs located within its boundaries. But these glimpses fall well short of the full frontal view needed to assess the current infrastructure needs of our cities and society's continuing ability to pay for them. The nation's economy is fraught with instances in which potentially valuable capital investment is depreciated in value prematurely or allowed to deteriorate physically within metropolitan areas and between regions of the country in order to maintain cash flows to our expanding service industries-health care, government, legal services, finance, casualty insurance, and education, to name a few of the largest. The expanding service industries in the boom areas of the United States appear to require new infrastructure to support their activity, but they hesitate to pay for providing it. In fact, it is often unclear how today's

114 JOHN S. ADONIS expanding service industries are analogous to yesterday's goods-producing and distribution industries, which received much of the infrastructure that they needed. Equally unclear is the extent to which public funds should underwrite the infrastructure needs of service industries because in many cases (Houston in the 1970s is probably a good example) it is uncertain whether their activity produces net gains for the national or regional bal- ance sheets. What in earlier days of abundant and essentially free natural resources was a simple tug of war between saving and spending between investment and consumption has now escalated to a more serious and pernicious conflict. Nothing of value is free anymore. One set of forces urges long-term maintenance and improvement of physical infrastructure that will support the economical production and distribution of goods and services that people who have a measure of consumer choice really want to buy. The pull in the opposite direction often comes from rapacious elements in certain service sectors that have been able to deliver overpriced services to involuntary customers trapped by location and barriers to the entry of new service providers. The first set of forces entails earning money the old-fashioned way, and part of today's service sector follows that tradition. The second set often entails making money by systematically taking it through exploitative activity that disrupts healthy economic de- velopment, disturbs the rational evolution of our urban areas, and draws down our investments in infrastructure instead of building them up. In metropolitan areas, large and untaxed capital gains on residential real estate accumulate in high-class suburbs, whereas corresponding uncom- pensated capital losses are drained from the homes and businesses of inner- city neighborhoods. Suburbs grow faster than they otherwise would. Sub- urban shopping centers are bigger and enjoy larger sales volumes than they otherwise would. Central city infrastructure is abandoned prematurely or lies in need of repair or replacement, for which there is no ability to pay. Meanwhile, the gain, if any, to the metropolitan economy is hard to assess. Among the various regions of the country, capital in the form of savings and taxes is withdrawn from some areas to be spent or invested elsewhere. Populations reared and educated in one set of areas move elsewhere to live, work, or retire. Some regions appear to be winners, and others seem to be losers. Yet it is unclear whether the nation has gained by these redistributions of existing forms of wealth and capital. INFRASTRUCTURE AT THE LOCAL SCALE The biggest determinant of demand for urban infrastructure is popu- lation, which at the local level is measured by size and geographical

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTA TE VAL UES 115 distribution. Within each locale, three broad classes of population move- ment affect size and distribution: (1) the long-term net movement from rural and small-town America to large urban areas; (2) the movement from central cities to surrounding suburbs; and (3) another long-term movement from the Northeast and Midwest to the West and South. Population moving out of one area and into another means added de- mand for infrastructure at the new location. It may also mean "wasted" capacity at the old location that is, capacity abandoned before reaching the end of its useful life, still fully usable but unwanted because of the relocation of demand and therefore lacking in economic value. Large-scale movement from one place to another normally raises land and housing prices at the destination and reduces them at the origin in relation to the levels that would have obtained without the movement. Thus, population movements affect the demand for infrastructure, and corresponding movements in real estate prices redistribute the ability to pay. Capital gains on real estate in new areas often escape taxes, however, and capital losses in areas of decline and outmigration are usually uncom- pensated. In the following sections, these issues will be examined in the context of (1) differential changes in the number of households from one metropolitan region to another, (2) price changes for owner-occupied and rental housing in three major metropolitan regions, and (3) new housing construction in selected central cities across the country at the end of the 1970s. HOUSEHOLDS AND HOUSING UNITS IN THE LARGEST CITIES About one of seven U.S. residents in 1980 lived in the five leading metropolitan areas at census time: New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Detroit. During the 1960s and 1970s, these top five added households and housing units at varying rates, except for the New York area, which suffered a slump in the 1970s (Table 6-11. Except for Los Angeles, the central cities (areas within city limits) saw declines in the number of households in the 1970s. For New York and Philadelphia, the central city household declines of the 1970s were a reversal of gains during the 1960s. Aggregate net population and household changes over a decade or two depend on four kinds of demographic events: births, deaths, moves in, and moves out. For example, the Chicago standard metropolitan statistical area (SMSA) gained 300,000 households in 1970s, but the central city lost 45,000. Migrants who were added to the central city from the suburbs, from outside the metropolitan area, and from abroad, plus births to res

116 Cal Ct U: o ._ _' of To Cal o JO Cal V) V) Can ·_1 Cal Cal o .~ Cal - o C) of IS V Cal is: o C) of Do JO _ o Cal .= ~4 ._ o o C=~ o ._ Ct oo o V O ~ ~ cry aN _ _ 1 ~ ~ ~- - 1 1 ~ 1 rid ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~cr cat ~ O ~ ~ ~ O ON ~ ~ ~ ~ Cal 00 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ ~ 1 ~- 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o~ 1 ~- 1 ~- - ~ ~- kD ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00_ 0 00 _ 0 _ U~ ~0 ~ ~_ ~ 00 1 C~ ~ 1 ~ - ~ - ~ _ C~ 00 00 C~ ~ oo oo ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ 00 _ ~ o~ ~ ~ 0 ~ _ _ C~ ~ ~ C~3 -) (~\ ~ ~- ~ \0 C7N ~ O ~ O O 00 ~ ~O ~ ~C~ ~ CN ON 00 - - ) ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0~ - ~ r~ ~ ~ 0 ~ _ _ ~ ~ _ _ ~ ~_ _ ~ ~ C ~ C~ O 00 ~ - O - ON r~ oo 0 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ - ~r _ 00 C~ - 0 0 ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~0 0 ~0 C~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~CS~ C) m ~L4 0 0 0 ;^ ~I ~;^ . _ . _ C~ · _ Ct · _ Ct Ct · ~ C~ ~ C D 'o ~ = D ~ ~ = D ~ ~ ~ D ~ ~ ~ D 1 o ~o Ct D ¢ Q - =t _ _ ._ ~n ._ Ct . ~ U~ o m Ct Ct a ;^ ._ V~ Ct 1 ~ O . ~ ~C1 1 c U3 "D Ct E~ - · ~Y 8 m ~ et c' ct k o ._ ._ V) V) o C~ Ct Ct Ct .. LU E~ O Y o ~ m Ct Ct Ct ¢ Ct ._ . O o ~: C) Ct - Ct ;^ o o^ C) °° 1 mo ~o m - _ c~ . . _ ~ ct o v' ~_ ~ - · c') ~ I.,,

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTATE VALUES 117 idents of the central city, minus those who moved out and residents who died meant a net loss of 45,000 households. The characteristics of the households in a metropolitan area and the decisions of their members about where to live establish the social ge- ography of the area. The social geography in turn determines much of the nature of demand for urban infrastructure and patterns of its use. In the Chicago area, as in other major urban regions, there are three main patterns of geographical variation from place to place (Berry and Kasarda, 1977; Pinkerton, 1969, 19731: variation in (1) socioeconomic status of house- holders, (2) stage in the life cycle of the household, and (3) race and ethnicity. Socioeconomic Status of Households The first pattern is the spatial variation in average socioeconomic status of householders and in the related value of the housing units they occupy. The map of social status and housing value usually shows distinct areal sectors radiating outward from the downtown. The sectors are often bounded by and aligned with major radial transport corridors linking the city center with places outside the metropolitan area. Upper-middle-class neighbor- hoods are found in one or more sectors of the city; other sectors are middle class in character, and the rest are distinctly working class in their measures of income, occupation, education levels, housing values, rent levels, and life-styles. Each sector reveals a tendency to project outward the general social class character of its inner-city neighborhoods.* Working-class central city neighborhoods project their outlooks and behaviors outward into what become working-class suburbs. Upper-class inner-city areas carry their affluence, life outlooks, and styles outward into exclusive suburbs. Middle-class and upper-middle-class sectors are usually the most dynamic. They generate the most vigorous and rapidly expanding suburban exten- sions and leave the largest number of vacancies at their inner precincts near the downtown. These vacated areas in turn lure immigrants and native minority households who are eager to establish themselves on the low rung of the housing and neighborhood ladder as they try to repeat the upward mobility success story of those who have already achieved the comfortable suburbs. Neither the rich nor the working poor display ag *A leading early discussion of this process appears in Park et al. (1925), especially chapters 2 and 3, pp. 47-79. The most complete treatment appears in Hoyt (1939), especially chapter 2, pp. 96-104. For comprehensive recent accounts, see Abler and Adams (1976) and Adams (1987).

118 .. JOHN S. ADAlLfS gressive efforts to document socioeconomic mobility through the practice of intraurban geographic mobility. Unlike the middle class, neither the rich nor the poor consider that their status has changed or that it will change soon. It is the mobile middle class that supplies most of the energy that transforms the map of social status. Stage in the Household Life Cycle A second geographical pattern is formed by the spatial segregation of households according to stage in the household life cycle. Small housing units built at high densities and favored by single persons, and small households at the beginning and ending stages of the household life cycle, are located mainly near the core of the central city along transit routes, near outlying commercial centers, and in suburban apartment districts, often adjacent to transport corridors and commercial land.* At the other extreme of the unit size and housing density continuum are large, single- unit houses on ample lots, catering to family households at their stage of maximum involvement with family life and child rearing. The family status of a household is basically independent of a household's socioeco- nomic status. Thus, the geographic patterning due to variations-usually sectoral-in the social status of an urban area is different from, and essentially unrelated to, the geographic patterning of an urban area in terms of the life-cycle stage of households and corresponding unit size and housing density. This second kind of pattern is usually concentric around the city center. Race and Ethnicity The third basic pattern of geographical variation in metropolitan areas is an expression of race and ethnicity. Maps of racial and ethnic patterns are significantly different from maps of family status and socioeconomic status, except in cases where social class is due in part to racial or ethnic characteristics or when family status flows in some measure from cultural practices based on ethnic roots or on practices rooted in religious belief (for example, the number of children or the persistence of extended fam- ilies). * On the location preferences of young unmarried persons and households without children and their willingness to pay high prices to be near goods and services they want, see Nelson (1973). For locational requirements of single and childless women in the labor force, see Roistacher and Senyoung (1980). On the general problem of family change and its impact on the city, see Frey and Korbin (1982).

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTATE VALUES 119 To summarize, the social geography and housing patterns of each U.S. metropolitan region are composed of at least three largely independent and additive patterns of variation: a socioeconomic pattern, a family status pattern, and a racial-ethnic pattern. The locations of births, deaths, house- hold moves in, and household moves out are regulated and shaped by the metropolitan region's social geography and related housing patterns. At the same time, natural and migration changes revise those social patterns and thereby contribute to the redesign of the housing landscape and a reordering of its patterns of use. SOCIAL STATUS AND HOUSING VALUE OF NEIGHBORHOODS Most residential neighborhoods of central cities decline in attractiveness or desirability in relation to their suburban counterparts. The suburbs offer newer houses, lower densities, easier movement, and the more exclusive socioeconomic environments that many households seem to prefer if they have the financial means to achieve them. The flow of causation in sub- urban development usually begins with land speculators and developers anticipating that new, high-priced houses can be built and sold for a profit at a specific suburban location. After the houses are built, sold, and occupied, the process is repeated but this time with less uncertainty. If the development fails or is slow to succeed, it is not repeated unless adjustments in project scale or housing styles and prices are made. The construction, sale, and occupancy of new suburban housing draw population out of the central city and soften the housing submarkets in the inner segments of markets that were developed during earlier periods (Lansing et al., 1969~. The average income levels of central city house- holds and the average market values of central city houses fall behind these measures in the suburbs. The movement of upper-income households from city to suburb sharply raises aggregate suburban income and lowers the city average income and usually its aggregate personal income as well. Withdrawing effective demand for housing from the central city and adding it to the suburbs causes housing prices to slide in the city because the housing supply remains roughly constant while demand is reduced. At the same time, such withdrawal causes housing prices to rise in the suburbs where supply is rising only slowly but strong demand continues. Certain portions of the central cities seem to resist these forces of decline and decay in the housing market. The evidence that they resist is the persistence of above-average housing values and above-average rents in a fast-changing metropolitan housing market. New housing, when it is built, is almost always significantly above average in value and rent levels; old housing, when it is removed from the stock and demolished, is usually

120 JOHN S. ADAAIS well below average in value and quality. The normal life cycle of a housing unit is a succession of stages from new and expensive to old and cheap. That process is interrupted when the physical structure after construction is maintained or improved in ways that preserve or enhance its relative desirability in the midst of a regularly updated and improved housing stock. Even though houses in the neighborhood continue to age, the obso- lescence, deterioration, and eventual dilapidation process can be averted, slowed, or reversed if the attractiveness of the neighborhood is maintained or improved. The value of a housing unit depends not only on the structure itself but also on the lot on which it stands. The value of the lot depends on the neighborhood social environment, the quality of the physical en- vironment and individuals' attitudes toward physical features, and the location of the lot with respect to the principal nodes of interaction in the local metropolitan system. * These three elements of housing value social environment, physical environment, and location are revealed in the central cities of the nation's three leading metropolitan areas: Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York. Inside these cities, highly valued physical amenities include quiet, cleanliness, open space, greenery, elevation, and views over water. Highly valued social environments are those with res- idences of upper-income groups and the retail and recreational facilities that they patronize. Where attractive physical amenities and desirable social environments coincide close to or within a vigorous downtown center, the third condition is met for maintaining housing demand and high housing prices. In neighborhoods such as these, the physical infra- structure must be maintained and regularly improved to sustain the heavy . . . . Or even increasing use it receives. Chicago Housing Values and Rent Levels In the city of Chicago the median value of owner-occupied housing (in tracts where owner-occupied housing pre- dominates) and the median contract rent (in tracts where rental housing predominates) were above the respective metropolitan averages in 1980 at locations along Lake Michigan and in selected neighborhoods at the north edge of the city and in the far south side (Figure 6-11. The lake provides a natural scenic and recreational amenity of great desirability; houses with a view of the lake command high premiums when rented or *For specific examples from an increasingly rich literature using this method of estimating the contribution of various elements to the value of housing, see Apps (1973), Bagby (1981), Bielby (1980), Dale-Johnson (1982), Daniels (1975), and Jackson (1979).

RECENT TRENDS IN URBLY REAL ESTATE VALUES 121 sold. As might be expected, the value of this amenity diminishes with increasing distance from the lake unless other factors interrupt the decline. South of downtown Chicago are four well-defined zones of above-average housing prices along the lake. The first runs from the south edge of downtown, north and south of Roosevelt Road, and along waterfront parks to McCormick Place (the Chicago Exhibition Center). The second occurs around the neighborhood of the Illinois Institute of Technology (between 31st and 35th Streets). The third surrounds the University of Chicago and the Hyde Park area (from 47th to 63rd Streets) and extends back from the lake almost a mile. The fourth zone of high value and persistently high rents runs from the 67th Street Beach to Rainbow Park Beach (79th Street). North of downtown, the high prices run in an unbroken string of tracts to the northern city boundary with Evanston and westward across the north end of the city in newer, high-quality housing. These highly prized areas feature attractive neighborhoods, open space and other physical amenities, and excellent access to the downtown, the lake, the parks, the industrial centers, and the shopping opportunities on the city's west side. They are relatively remote from the noise, pollution, and social environment of the poor minority areas on the south side. When developers sense that the housing market in these above-average inner-city neighborhoods is strong and likely to remain so, new housing is often added at market rates, which holds the tracts' average housing price high or raises it even higher. It is the desire of above-average-income households to maintain the value of their houses, but it is the above- average structures and environmental attributes (social, physical, loca- tional) that attract these households from other places and in the process maintain the value of housing. Changes in Housing Values and Rent Levels in Chicago, 1970-1980 The 1980 median contract rent in the Chicago SMSA was $214, which was 65 percent higher than the median of $130 in 1970.* The consumer price index of residential rents in the Chicago SMSA also rose more than 60 percent, from 107.6 in 1970 (1967 = 100) to 172.2 in 1980 (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 19831. In a general metropolitan climate of rising rents, certain city tracts with a majority of rental units had rent increases above the SMSA average. Sometimes the above-average rise accompanied changes in the tracts' rental stock as a result of rehabilitation, remodeling, or clearance and replacement. Sometimes tracts were abruptly exposed to intensified de *U.S. Bureau.of the Census, 1980 and 1970 Censuses of Population and Housing. Census Tracts. Chicago SMSA, Table Hi.

122 PARK RIDGE JOHNS. ADAMS Housing Values and Rent Levels, 1980, and Changes in Values and Rent Levels, 1970-1980 Median value of owner occupied housing (where owner occupied units predominate), or it, ~ t: ~ median contract rent (where rental units predominate) exceeds 1980 SMSA median. Median value of owner occupied housing percentage increase, 1970 to 1980 (where owner occupied units predominate), or median contract rent percentage increase, 1970 to 1980 (where rental units predominate) exceeded SMSA percentage increase. (Maps based on sample of one-third of all tracts. Condominiums excluded from value ca Iculations.) SKOKIE EVANSTON . ... ~ ~ . OAK PARK · CICERO OAK LAWN N 1 0 4 Mi. 1 , 1 11 0 4 Km. - a, u' '~L loving Park Rd CHICAGO . 1 Diversey Av .. · · . · - · · . . U~vlslon Ol,\ >~ · · · Widow; | W 47thSt · . · ~ ,_ W bbth At W 79th St 1~ . ~::N ..... _: '',,.' ~, ~ ~ ~ 18 f ·: ~ By/ FIGURE 6-1 Housing values and rent levels in Los Angeles and Chicago. Data sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1970 and 1980 Censuses of Housing. Maps designed by the author.

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTATE VALUES 123 ~ / . . :. ~ ., i, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i. :: ~ ~ ~ it, :.,. N WE / , /<O,o Varier ! ~i ,. ,: ~::~ i.: . ~ ~ ~ ::,:: ,, 2:,.~: ~ . Cab - ~brie/ i,, . , Of,,, ... ... . ~ I ..... . ,~,i BURBANK / ta ns "''""'' A~ /5aota~onicaM°U LOS ANGELES~. ~ Pacific Ocean l 0 4 Km. \~ i,, ,_ ~ i, At ,,, . Aft ., ~ ~ , ::.:.: : ~ :::: #: : ~ ~ :~ V ~ I: :-: I ' : ''.::. .. 2¢: \ ,:~, \:- j,l ~ I Watts: Id TORRANCE ~ A/ ~ .~. ~ ~ 4 · ~ .~ GLENOAlE _,~ ~PASADENA · · .~ .~ .. , ~ , . , .: _ ... ~ Id) . .~ ! WHITTIER O I 4~ Hi. ~ ~J Los Angeles-Long Beach SMSA19701980 Change Median value, owned units$ 24.285$ 87,400 260 % Median contract rent$ 123$ 244 98 % Chicago SMSA19701980 Change Median value, owned units$ 24,360$ 65,000 167 % Median contract rent$ 130$ 214 65 % FIGURE 6-1 Continued.

124 JOHN S. ADAlklS mend without a corresponding expansion of the supply at prevailing prices, such as in newly fashionable areas or around schools and hospitals that expanded in the 1970s or at the leading edges of expanding minority neighborhoods. The same observations can be made about owner-occupied housing in the city of Chicago and how it maintained its relative value in the met- ropolitan housing market in the 1970s. The median value of owner-oc- cupied housing in the Chicago SMSA in 1980 was $65,000, up 167 percent from $24,360 in 1970. Again, as in the case of new rental units, new construction on vacant and cleared sites supplied new owner-occupied units in the largely built-up central city. But because most of the new housing in the metropolitan area was built in the suburbs in the 1970s and because most newly built housing carries prices well above the metro- politan median, it is a struggle for central city housing to retain its value relative to the entire metropolitan housing stock, which is constantly im- proving in quality and advancing in price. Most of the Chicago tracts that had median rents and median values rising faster than average in the 1970s were located in the northeastern quadrant of the city (see Figure 6-11. These areas have not generally been the locations of major redevelopment activity. Thus, the higher-than- average price inflation for housing must be traceable to strong demand in those neighborhoods for a relatively fixed supply of rental and owned housing units. Los Angeles Housing Values and Rent Levels The unrelenting demand pressure on the Los Angeles SMSA (i.e., Los Angeles County) housing stock, plus a continuing stream of high-priced additions to the stock, raised the median value of owner-occupied housing units from $24,285 in 1970 to $87,400 in 1980, an extraordinary rise of 260 percent. (It is especially extraordinary considering that the parallel rise in the Chicago SMSA was 167 percent, as noted in the previous section, and 126 percent in the New York SMSA, which is discussed in the next section.) The median contract rent in the Los Angeles SMSA rose 98 percent, from $123 in 1970 to $244 in 1980 (Badcock, 1984; Palm, 1981; Vance, 19761. The median value of owner-occupied housing (in tracts where owned housing predominates) and the median contract rent (in tracts where rentals predominate) were above the corresponding metropolitan averages in northwest Los Angeles in the direction of the San Fernando Valley, west of downtown to Santa Monica, through Hollywood and Beverly Hills to the foothills of the Santa Monica Mountains. Median housing values and

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTATE VALUES 125 rents were also well above metropolitan averages on the far south side where there is a mixture of old and new on the hills near San Pedro Bay, and along much of the coast and in the newer areas of Long Beach (see Figure 6-1~. The two large districts of the city that are excluded from the regions of high values and above-average rents are the largely Hispanic east side of downtown and the region south and southwest of downtown, the region that has been the city's principal middle-class housing corridor for up- wardly mobile newcomers. The first wave of newcomers were transplanted from the Midwest, coming in large numbers in the decades before and after World War I. They prospered and moved south and east (continued movement southwest was blocked by the ocean), to be followed by blacks from the western regions of the Old South and from Texas. In the 1970s and 1980s, newcomers south of downtown include large numbers of Asians (the Korean population alone is said to number 250,0001. As Los Angeles increasingly becomes the nation's premier immigrant city, the historic immigrant reception neighborhoods south and east of downtown Los An- geles continue to perform their traditional function, and on a grand scale. Changes in Los Angeles Housing Prices and Rent Levels, 1970-1980 The city of Los Angeles appears to retain a large share of the metropolitan area's exclusive neighborhoods as well as low-income minority areas. Housing in the exclusive areas appreciated faster than the SMSA average in the 1970s in the very areas that featured above-average values and rents (see Figure 6-11. In addition, values and rents rose faster than metropolitan averages in selected regions of the lower income areas south and west of downtown, which were straining to accommodate a large influx of new- comers during the 1970s when the SMSA (the county) added 436,000 persons. New York City Housing Values and Rent Levels The median value of owner-occupied housing in New York City (in tracts where owned housing predominates) and the median contract rent (in tracts where rentals predominate) were above the respective 1980 metropolitan averages in many parts of the city at census time (Figure 6-21. The median value of specified owner-occupied housing units in the SMSA was $64,300; the SMSA median contract rent was $220 (Stegman, 19851. There is significant variation from borough to borough in the city's housing values and costs. Rents in Richmond and Manhattan are higher than the metropolitan averages, whereas the other boroughs fall below

126 JOHN S. ADAMS Housing Values and Rent Levels, 1980, and Changes in Values and Rent Levels, 1970-1980 Median value of owner occupied housing (where owner occupied units predominate), or median contract rent (where rental units predominate) exceeds 1 980 SMSA median. Median value of owner occupied housing percentage increase, 1970 to 1980 (where owner occupied units predominate), or median contract rent percentage increase, 1970 to 1980 (where rental units predominate) exceeded SMSA percentage increase. (Map based on sample of one-fourth of all tracts. Condominiums excluded from value calculations.) New York SMSA1970 Median value, owned units$ 28,416 Median contract rent$ 117 ) it, .? 1 980 Change $ 64,300 126 % $ 220 88 % . STATEN ISLAND {RICHMOND County) fail/ 1~ . ...... .. .... .. ... .............. .................... .. . . ::::::::::::::::::::: · · . FIGURE 6-2 Housing values and rent levels in New York City. Data sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1970 and 1980 Censuses of Housing. Maps designed by the autlior.

^~ ~ ~ ~( ^~[ 66~ ~! 72 7 ~llIlIlI11 :? #} ~ me. lllllIllll!l!Illll~l~lll~i~: ~ 2~1~ ~ / ~ MY Coun4) ~ ~ it' ~3111!~ ~. a. ' ~ \ :::t \ #. ~ ' ^1 I II! ~ s~ss., ~1111IIlIlll!ll~!~ss. ~1!ll1!1!!!!!! ( 11111111~!~ss.. ~ ~!~!IIIIlIIIIII I!IIlll!lll>~ < ~ ^. .:'. ' a'.\ . · . ? 8ROOK~N WINGS Cow} ' ~!~!~!~!~!~!~! ~ SSS. Bay 1 !!!!!!!!!~!~Si ~!II ~31~ . ._ ~ FIcuRE 6-2 ConOnued. ~ J ~ ~ Inn Airport ~/I{~ ~ ~::::::S:::::::~' ~ ~.~# 1 1 ! : i 0 4 Km. 4 V1

128 JOHN S. ARMS them. Meanwhile, the average values of owner-occupied housing in the central city boroughs, with the exception of Manhattan, are well below the metropolitan average. The residential districts in New York City with rents (i.e., in tracts where rental housing predominates) and housing values (i.e., in tracts where owner-occupied housing units are the majority) above the SMSA average are concentrated on Manhattan at the southern tip of the island; north of Houston Street on either side of Fifth Avenue in the vicinity of New York University; south, west, and east of Central Park; around the edges of the Bronx near the water; in Queens on either side of Flushing Meadow Park; and in scattered neighborhoods of Brooklyn near Jamaica Bay, Rockaway Beach, Manhattan Beach, park districts, and near the bridge to Manhattan (see Figure 6-21. A few newly developed tracts in central Richmond County were also above average. Changes in Housing Values and Rent Levels in New York, 1970-1980 The median value of owner-occupied housing (excluding co-ops and condo- miniums) in the New York SMSA rose 126 percent between 1970 and 1980; during the same period, median contract rents rose just 88 percent. * Many tracts throughout the five boroughs had value and rent rises in excess of the metropolitan averages. A systematic one-in-four sample of the census tracts in New York City revealed widespread inflation of rents and values in south, central, and north Manhattan and in a few locations near the older, high-density rental areas of Staten Island (see Figure 6-2~. One explanation for the rises in values and rents may be the sub- stantial amount of new housing constructed in New York City in the 1970s (213,000 structures in the five boroughs, many with two or more housing units); the high value of new structures can pull up the median for a particular tract. Demand for city rather than suburban living pushed up prices in both owner-occupied areas and in predominantly rental areas. Prices might have risen even faster if New York City had not had a strict rent control law. On the other hand, if there had been no rent control, faster inflation might have stimulated even more new construction than actually occurred. COMPARING CENTRAL CITY AND METROPOLITAN AREA HOUSING VALUES Suburban areas around central cities and upper-middle-class submarkets within cities and suburbs enjoyed above-average appreciation in housing U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1980 and 1970 Censuses of Population and Housing. Census Tracts. New York SMSA, Table Hi.

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTA TE VAL UES 129 prices in the 1970s and received a disproportionate share of the new construction that occurred during the decade. New housing is usually more expensive than existing housing, and when it is built, it not only raises the median housing values in an area but also pulls up the values of lower priced houses, which become more attractive when located near higher priced properties (Follain and Malpezzi, 19811. The dynamics of this process yield faster-than-average residential expansion in higher priced housing districts in selected suburbs and central cities. This faster-than- average growth places strains on existing infrastructure, which is normally augmented often at public expense to accommodate the expansion pressure. If average cost-pricing schemes are used to extend water, sewer, roads, schools, and other infrastructure, the new areas can receive high- quality services at prices below the cost of producing the services, whereas customers and residents in older settled areas pay higher costs for services that may be deteriorating. The dynamics and economics of local housing markets interact with the supply, demand, and pricing of other elements of infrastructure to yield an unstable and often inequitable marriage of the two systems. One set of zones receives free benefits while the other areas pay high prices for the services of inferior infrastructure. Part of the instability can be traced to the fact that middle-class and upper-middle-class households accrued significant untaxed capital gains on their houses in the 1970s, and those gains lowered significantly (some- times to zero or less) their real after-tax housing costs. Above-average disposable household income in middle-class and upper-middle-class neighborhoods combined with a high average propensity to spend, based in part on the steadily enhanced wealth position of the homeowner, con- tribute to a strong tax base; a healthy, vigorous, and attractive business environment that people enjoy living near and using; good practices of augmenting and tending the physical and scenic infrastructure of the area; and a self-perpetuating aura of attractiveness. Thus, in a circular, cu- mulative process, attractive upper-middle-class neighborhoods are created, occupied, and maintained. Renters also like to live in these areas and will do so if they can afford to, leaving if they cannot. Above-average advances in housing prices in such neighborhoods, however, usually force many renters out even if zoning permits them. Owners are insulated from above-average value increases they actually benefit from them whereas renters enjoy no such protection, except in the rare case in which rents are kept well below market levels by local rent control ordinances. Where are these prized locations? They occur usually in one or two suburban sectors that lie beyond the central city neighborhoods that en- joyed that high status at an earlier time. Occasionally, a central city will

130 JOlIN S. ADAMS retain some neighborhoods that compete effectively with the more desir- able and exclusive suburbs. If the central cities succeed in the competi- tion- as they have in Seattle, San Francisco, St. Paul, Minneapolis, New Orleans, Miami, and some others they can retain a significant share of the metropolitan leadership and put that leadership to work on their behalf. If they cannot, the leadership eventually abandons the central city for the suburbs, leaving a core city with a much diminished capacity to dictate the terms of its future as a place to live, work, and recreate. Most new housing units built in recent decades have been erected on new land in suburban settings, yet construction has also continued in the city. Some new housing has been built on former railroad, port, and obsolete industrial land; some has been put into completely remodeled warehouses and factory buildings; some school buildings have been re- habilitated and converted to residential use; and some new housing has been placed in central city neighborhoods on land cleared of a former residential use. The new housing is often built at densities higher than that of the obsolete housing it replaces. Since 1970 a significant amount of new housing has been built in or near the downtown of cities, occasionally as one element in a development program that includes several functions, such as hotels, shops, offices, and housing. Sometimes the houses, apartment buildings, condominiums, and other housing styles stand alone as separate private or publicly spon- sored projects. Sometimes the new housing comes about as a result of major building rehabilitation or renovation. Occasionally, new housing is the result of a historic preservation project in the oldest part of town, which is usually the core (Laska and Spain, 1980; Mercer and Phillips, 1981; Rosenthal, 19801. Houses built one or two at a time can succeed in the suburbs, but in the built-up central city, new residential development must go forth at a sufficiently large scale to succeed. Housing provides a bundle of services: a structure and dwelling place, the social and physical environment of the neighborhood, and accessibility to various sections of the urban area. If a residential development takes place at a sufficiently large scale for example, 10 acres or more it can virtually create its own physical and social environment. Then its chances of success will vary with its acces- sibility. If a new development on the edge of the built-up area or near the core is located in a sector of the urban area that has been traditionally favored by the elite, it is much easier to establish a social environment that will promote the success of the development. In developments on the edge of the built-up area, large parcels of land are usually available for housing. In inner-city redevelopment, small parcels are usually the only kind available. Complex development

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTA TE VAL UES 131 projects and financial deals that include inner-city land acquisition for housing often favor large buildings on small parcels. For one thing, profits can be greater for a given amount of entrepreneurial and man- agement effort on a large downtown project than on a small one. More- over, because land acquisition for a single parcel is easier than for multiple parcels, costly delays during the land acquisition phase of development can be controlled. In the 1970s most new housing construction occurred in the suburbs; both the central city and the downtown area received their shares of new housing construction (Figures 6-3 through 6-81. The developments in the inner city received more press attention than those in the suburbs because they were often more interesting visually and seemed to be dramatic. They were easy to notice and convenient for the press to cover. Moreover, in the context of post-World War II suburban residential trends through the 1960s, the downtown developments were somewhat unexpected and fre- quently triggered conflict, with the resulting media attention that generally follows. CONCLUSIONS The dominant technology and resources during each U.S. growth epoch defined the locations that enjoyed economic advantage over oth- ers of their day. The infrastructure that was built to support city building and trade during each epoch responded to the needs of the day and helped bring unused and underused resources into fuller production. That principle remains true today: sound infrastructure development and maintenance will help bring resources into fuller production to provide the goods and services people want to buy. But today it is often unclear whether the fastest growing industries or locations are dem- onstrating a fair and healthy economic advantage over others and there- fore should be accommodated with appropriate infrastructure at public expense. Sometimes industries and, as a consequence, the regions in which they are headquartered appear merely to be preying on other segments of society as a result of defective or incomplete understandings of how the urban economy works. Perhaps the costs of expanding the infrastructure should be charged more fully to the primary beneficiaries, as in the case of property owners in high-value, rapidly appreciating real estate submarkets. In urban geography and in urban economics, what is familiar is often thought to be necessary, but it may not be. The housing industry and the fast-growth service industries should be closely scrutinized to assess their net contribution to the commonwealth and their genuine need for additional

132 BOSTON ir ,:~ =:, , :~ _ ~Km \: ~ , ' .\ ,, NEWARK : ~, ~ N ~ ~ ~ at' ~ .x: - -r ~-- T -' 0 2 Mi. O 2 Km. JOHN S. ADAMS ~ /i''. 4 Mi \/' FIGURE 6-3 New central city housing in the Northeast: Buffalo, Boston, Pitts- burgh, and Newark. Data source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1980 Census of Housing. Maps designed by the author.

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTATE VALUES Housing Units Built 1979 through March 1980: Northeast /~- ,,. :: ' : Number of Units -I 101 - 1000 , ~- ~ 51-100 ... _ \ >~N : BUFFALO ~, 0 4 Mi. 1 0 4 Km. ~ at_ :~ 26-50 1 1 -25 ~ 1 - 10 No Data BURGH I ! . i, ~1~ O 4 Km FIGURE 6-3 Continued. i MY 133

134 <-a-, N ~9 JOlIN S. ADAMS Housing Units Built 1979 through March 1980: Midwest : ~. 1° \ ''" ~ If_ WoK' _N I i , ~ ~ COLUMBUS its ~ ~ 'I ~ \: :~; 1 _ , ~ I- a, ";''' ,~g 0 4 Km. ~ 1~- ~\ 1 Ly U:~.~ I- 1 Age. .- ~ FIGURE 6-4 New central city housing in the Midwest: Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Columbus. Data source: see Figure 6-3. Significant amounts of new housing construction occurred in Milwaukee in the vigorous northwest sector, where the eight leading tracts had >1,500 new units. New units near the city center were scarce, except for the high-amenity location near the lake. The quiet and stable southside had small numbers of new units added at many locations. Except for one tract on the east edge of downtown with 180 units, and another west-side tract on the lake with 164, new housing construction in Cleveland was extremely sparse. Vigorous north-side Columbus had many hundreds of new units at various locations. The south edge of the city got the smallest share of new units.

135 Rr;scS IN U~¢ MEL E ~MCKEE r {m. Her of Units ~ i01 - 10°° 51 - 100 26 - 50 1_25 1 - 10 * No Data . ~ ~ - ~ , " continued Fast 6-4 ~ ~4 {m

136 \ JOHN 5. ADAA~S Housing Units Built 1979 through March 1980: Midwest if. ~ rat ~ ~en.: CINCINNATI ~ ~ Cal ~ , in, ~ ~ ~ o | ~ ~- T 0 4 Km. 4 Ml. _ . . . >, ~ I'm! ~ ~ FIGURE 6-5 New central city housing in the Midwest: Cincinnati, Kansas City, and St. Louis. Data source: see Figure 6-3. Cincinnati reported several large clusters of new housing completed on the west side, with two tracts each receiving >150 new units, and another >200. The east and north sides had significant numbers of new units in various locations, but almost no new construction occurred in the old core-city tracts. One tract near downtown Kansas City, Mo., received almost 100 new housing units, and a peripheral tract in Kansas City, Kans., had >50. Other tracts in both cities had few or none. The same was true in St. Louis. Several tracts close to downtown had a total of ~500 new housing units. Another western tract west of Forest Park by Washington University had almost 200. Elsewhere, new construction was extremely limited or nonexistent.

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTATE VALUES - r, , KANSAS CITY Number of Units · 101 - 1000 · 51 - 100 · 26- 50 e 1 1 - 25 ~ 1 - 10 * No Data FIGURE 6-5 Continued. 2 Km. _ : ,.~ 1 ST. LOUIS /1 /~ ~i i, ' 1 ~ ~ it' 137 N 0 2 Ml. I , . J 0 2 Km.

138 JOHN S. ADONIS Housing Units Built 1979 through March 1980: South ; ~ ,, <... MIAMI : lo' 1 to 1,, I, 0 2 Km. OF ~~ ..3 1 -A ~ , t} 1 ~ i.~¢ , ,, / ~ i.':> 1'~-;'' ~ 1 I / Number of Units 101 - 1000 Is 1 1 - 25 51 - 100 ~ 1 - 10 > 26- 50 ~ No Data FIGURE 6-6 New central city housing in the South: Baltimore, Washington, and Miami. Data source: see Figure 6-3. Scattered development and redevelopment projects in Baltimore added >100 new housing units in each of seven tracts, but the core tracts in general had little new housing, like most tracts elsewhere in the city. New housing construction occurred throughout Washington and was espe- cially intense around the core and in tracts to the north and east of Rock Creek Park. The largest increment was at the northeastern edge, behind the National Arboretum. In Miami, new housing construction was significant in all parts of the city, but was most intense in tracts by the ocean just north and south of downtown.

RE CENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ES TA TE VAL UES it, at,, \ \ BALTIMORE a 1 ' ' 1 1 0 4 Km. J~ : ( '--em ' 'I ~)'.~: 4 Mi. ~:~ ': -~1~ ~/ , A, ~ WASHINGTON, D.C. ~, ~ FIGURE 6-6 Continued. - l n 0 4 Km. 139 /

140 JOHN S. ADA1,IS Housing Units Built 1979 through March 1980: South Jot 1 \r~ ~ ~ ~ ~\ ~1~ ~1 o l 2 Km. NEW ORLEANS Number of Units 2501 or more (6026) ~ 51 - 100 1 001 - 2500 ~26 - 50 101 - 1000 * 11 - 25 1 - 10 - \ FIGURE 6-7 New central city housing in the South: Dallas, Houston, and New Orleans. Data source: see Figure 6-3. The few hundred new housing units added to core tracts in Dallas do not compare with the many thousands built on the north and east sides during the same period. There was a modest rate of construction on the south and west sides as well, with a peak of >600 in one peripheral tract there. Houston was one of the nation's great boom cities of the 1970s and new housing construction throughout the city in the 1970s was part of the result. The west side got the most new units, but almost all tracts in all parts of the city got significant numbers of new units. New Orleans received significant new construc- tion, especially in the newly developed northeastern, western, and southeastern down-river tracts. The old, historic, and often protected inner city tracts had modest rates of new construction, but the number of units in each tract is small.

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTATE VALUES 141 HOUSTON 4 Em FIGURE 6-7 Continued.

142 ~ WW n6RnFN GROVE ~ JOHN S. ADAMS Housing Units Built 1979 through March 1980: West SACRAMENTO ~ ''\ ~ o ~ . . 0 2 Km. ~ M _ ~ Number of Units 1 001 - 2500 101 _ 1000 5 1 - 1 00 * 26- 50 ~ 11 - 25 ~ 1 - 10 ~ No Data = . ~ 1~ ~ I - . ~\~ f 1 t l: .) . . .1 L" . . ~ :_T r at:,: -it ,.~ _., ~ · o t-r ~ ' ' ' 0 4 Km ~ hi,.) SANTA ANA REV N 4 Ml. FIGURE 6-8 New central city housing in the West: Sacramento, Anaheim/Santa Ana/Garden Grove and Riverside/San Bernadino/Ontario. Data source: see Figure 6-3. Half of the core tracts of Sacramento received no new housing construction, and the other half had only modest amounts. Farther out, in the south, east, and north sides, construction was vigorous. Anaheim, Garden Grove, and Santa Ana received new housing in all parts of these cities. It is hard to see any bias toward

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTATE VALUES ~ 1 SAN BERNARDINO J /~' 1 ~/ .~.d ~ /V ONTARIO 0 4 N - - I 0 4 Krn FIGURE 6-8 Continued. the downtowns and old cores (which are not very old by East Coast standards) or away from them. The Riverside area on the south had new construction at significant levels in all parts of the city. San Bernadino was also vigorously building in all districts of the city. Only two tracts in Ontario had no construction. In all three cities, core tracts generally had new construction but at levels lower than in newer peripheral tracts. 143 . , it* : of: ~ ~ · ' ~ ~ ~ ~ RIVERSIDE , By, ~ ,;..~; \ .~ - ~ it,. \ r \ ~ ~ ~ >by\

144 JOHN S. ADAMS infrastructure at public expense; otherwise, it is easy for situations to develop in which capital losers subsidize capital winners, instability in- creases, and infrastructure is wasted. REFERENCES Abler, R. F., and J. S. Adams. 1976. A Comparative Atlas of America's Great Cities: Twenty Metropolitan Regions. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Adams, J. S. 1987. Housing America in the 1980s. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Apps, A. F. 1973. An approach to urban modeling and evaluation. 1. A residential model. 2. Implicit prices for housing services. Environment and Planning 5:705-717. Badcock, B. 1984. Unfairly Structured Cities. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell. Bagby, D. G. 1981. The effects of traffic flow on residential property values. Journal of the American Planning Association 46:88-94. Berry, B. J. L., and J. D. Kasarda. 1977. Contemporary Urban Ecology. New York: Macmillan. Bielby, W. T. 1980. Evaluating Measures of Neighborhood Quality in the Annual Housing Survey. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Dale-Johnson, D. 1982. An alternative approach to housing market segmentation using hedonic price data. Journal of Urban Economics 11:311-332. Daniels, C. B. 1975. The influence of racial segregation on housing prices. Journal of Urban Economics 2:105-122. Follain, J. R., and S. Malpezzi. 1981. Estimates of housing inflation for 39 SMSAs: An alternative to the consumer price index. Annals of Regional Science 14(31:41-56. Frey, W. H., and F. E. Korbin. 1982. Changing families and changing mobility: Their impact on the central city. Demography 19(3):261-275. Hoyt, H. 1939. The Structure and Growth of Residential Neighborhoods in American Cities. Washington, D.C.: Federal Housing Administration. Jackson, J. R. 1979. Intraurban variation in the price of housing. Journal of Urban Eco- nomics 6(4):464-479. Lansing, J. B., C. W. Clifton, and J. N. Morgan. 1969. New Homes and Poor People: A Study of Chains of Moves. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan. Laska, S.B., and D. Spain, eds. 1980. Back to the City: Issues in Neighborhood Renovation. New York: Pergamon Press. Mercer, J., and D. A. Phillips. 1981. Attitudes of homeowners and the decision to reha- bilitate property. Urban Geography 2(3):216-236. Nelson, R. H. 1973. Accessibility and rent: Applying Becker's time-price concept to the theory of residential location. Urban Studies 10(1):83-86. Palm, R. I. 1981. The Geography of American Cities. New York: Oxford University Press. Park, R. E., E. W. Burgess, and R. D. McKenzie. 1925. The City. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Pinkerson, J. R. 1969. City-suburban residential patterns by social class: A review of the literature. Urban Affairs Quarterly 4(4):499-519. Pinkerton, J. R. 1973. The changing class composition of cities and suburbs. Land Eco- nomics 49(4):462-469. Roistacher, E. A., and J. S. Senyoung. 1980. Working women and city structure: Impli- cations of the subtle revolution. Signs 5(3):220-225. Rosenthal, D. O., ed. 1980. Urban Revitalization. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.

RECENT TRENDS IN URBAN REAL ESTA TE VAL UES 145 Stegman, M. A. 1985. Housing in New York. Piscataway, N.J.: The Center for Urban Policy Research. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1983. Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1984. 104th ed. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office. Vance, J. E., Jr. 1976. The American city: Workshop for a national culture. Pp. 1-49 in Contemporary Metropolitan America, Vol. 1, J. S. Adams, ed. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger.

Next: 7 Infrastructures for Movement: Past and Future »
Cities and Their Vital Systems: Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $95.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Cities and Their Vital Systems asks basic questions about the longevity, utility, and nature of urban infrastructures; analyzes how they grow, interact, and change; and asks how, when, and at what cost they should be replaced. Among the topics discussed are problems arising from increasing air travel and airport congestion; the adequacy of water supplies and waste treatment; the impact of new technologies on construction; urban real estate values; and the field of "telematics," the combination of computers and telecommunications that makes money machines and national newspapers possible.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!