Photo credit: [phil h]
The most recent Freakonomics Quorum on NYTimes.com asked a panel this question: "What will U.S. suburbs look like in 40 years?" Their experts weighed in with thought-provoking and sometimes apocalyptic visions of suburbia's future, which got us thinking about what the future holds for our own region.
On the one hand, Chattanooga is in the midst of a remarkable story of transformation, garnering media attention around the globe for the 21st Century Waterfront and revitalized in-town neighborhoods. Yet at the same time, our sprawling suburbs are growing just as rapidly in every direction. Is it possible for Chattanooga to sustain these competing ways of life over the next four decades?
Perhaps the most inflammatory prediction offered in the Freakonomics Quorum is this one, by author James Kunstler, who sees suburbia as inherently unsustainable due to its reliance on cheap energy:
“The suburbs have three destinies, none of them exclusive: as materials salvage, as slums, and as ruins.”
He goes on to describe the types of communities that can thrive in the future:
"We will have to return to traditional modes of inhabiting the landscape — villages, towns, and cities, composed of walkable neighborhoods and business districts — and the successful ones will have to exist in relation to a productive agricultural hinterland, because petro-agriculture (as represented by the infamous 3000-mile Caesar salad) is also now coming to an end. Fortunately, we have many under-activated small towns and small cities in favorable locations near waterways. This will be increasingly important as transport of goods by water regains importance."
This sounds a bit like the Scenic City, doesn't it? The Tennessee River, already a central figure in Chattanooga's narrative of renewal, would be well poised to once again serve as a hub for trade. In-town neighborhoods such as Main Street, the North Shore and even St. Elmo are embracing the concept of the walkable urban village where people can live, work and play. There's even a growing sustainable agriculture movement led by Crabtree Farms.
Chattanooga may not be an urban utopia just yet, but a foundation for this type of sustainable future is underway. Now, what about those pesky suburbs? Outlying communities from Ringgold to Ooltewah to Soddy-Daisy are bursting with new residential developments. Each new subdivision may be a little further from the city but the prospect of a little more house for the dollar still tempts.
How far away will people who must commute to the city (or Enterprise South) for a good job be willing to live? Will the suburbs continue to remain affordable and attractive for all? Jan Brueckner, professor of economics at the University of California, Irvine, says no. But rather than predicting a suburban apocalypse, he believes increased diversity is the future of suburbia:
“If [gentrification] continues in a significant way, large numbers of suburban households looking for urban stimulation may end up switching places with minority central-city dwellers, stirring the ethnic pot in both places.”
The Chattanooga area has seen a growth in diversity over the last decade, and that trend will continue, likely in urban and suburban areas alike. As reported by the Chicago Tribune, the Census Bureau today released population projections that estimate minorities will comprise 54% of our national population by 2050. Where that growth will occur and how those populations will be integrated—or not—is another question facing our city.
The sustainable future isn't necessarily a question of cities versus suburbs, though, says Alan Berube, research director and fellow at the Metropolitan Policy Program at the Brookings Institution. He attempts to reframe the debate altogether:
“… in 40 years perhaps we’ll get beyond our fixation with “the suburbs” (love them or hate them) and develop a richer vocabulary for what lies beyond the city limits.”
No matter whose predictions you find most likely, what's clear is that the Chattanooga of 2048 will look vastly different than it does today. Ensuring we can still be proud to call this city home will take not only visionary leadership, but informed involvement by each of us.
How do you see Chattanooga changing in the next 40 years—and what are you doing about it?
John Hawbaker
R. on Aug. 14, 2008
I love Kunstler. I have a soft spot for the Mad Max movies and his hellish vision of future-suburbia just fits in there.
When he's not scaring the crap out of people or telling us our urban planning sucks, he critiques architecture. His take on the Hunter: http://www.kunstler.com/eyesore_200706.html
davidm. on Aug. 14, 2008
I tend to side with Berube on this debate. While suburban sprawl is a problem in terms of efficiency and the amount of waste it creates, I'm not really convinced that the majority of Chattanoogans have the same outlook on the "centralized urban center" as many of us would like to think.
The 'Burbs will continue to exist as long as they remain an affordable option. Rising energy costs and fallout from the housing bubble may help push the pendulum the other way, but we're far from the critical mass needed to make that shift a viable reality. Also, Chattanooga's infrastructure and economic landscape may not be ready for such a shift.
40 years is a long time, but the changes we're talking about are pretty major.
Joel K on Aug. 15, 2008
People think we are crazy for having a family and kids downtown. There is this idea that the suburbs is where you start and raise a family. Perhaps families will begin to come downtown, but it is such a radical idea and I don't see economics changing to the point where everyone has to suddenly abandon the suburbs.
I think the suburbs are here to stay.
mark mcknight on Aug. 16, 2008
I'd agree with David, these changes will likely cause the majority of people to move toward the traditional urban core at the expense of the suburbs. People like suburbs. The only thing inherently wrong with them: the fact that people rely on cheap oil to live there.
If the cheap oil goes, the suburbs will likely remain, but you will see more families sharing the larger homes. Lawns will become gardens, neighborhoods without any retail or office space will start to convert some structures over for those uses. Bicycles, motorcycles, and other cheap or free transportation will become more important. Local culture and entertainment will once again be important. Traditional rural ingenuity will have to resurface as people learn how to re-use things, grow their own food, and trade for specialty items they need.
If "city" services become too expensive to keep running, water will come from wells again, septic fields will replace sewer services. Basically we'd be turning the clock back sixty or seventy years. Life will likely be tougher in the suburbs and easier in the central city, reversing the changes that have occurred since rural electrification and central heat & air conditioning.
John Hawbaker on Aug. 18, 2008
I appreciate the great comments, everyone.
I tend to agree that the absence of cheap oil in the long term will force drastic changes on the suburbs. While I don't see them becoming ruins or slums as does Kunstler, I do think society will have to shift back towards a neighborhood-focused lifestyle, including local agriculture, etc. The problem, of course, is that these types of changes will be much easier for the people who might not have trouble affording the suburbs anyway. If you have equity in a home and make a good salary, it's a lot easier to pick up and move towards the city center. It is already prohibitively expensive for many people to move into the downtown, North Shore or Southside areas. If these shifts do occur, there will likely be more growing pains.
Charles Allison on Aug. 18, 2008
I'm going to paint myself into a corner at the "way kind bean shack" here, but the planet has been working its problems out for over 13 billion years and has pretty much made apparent what works and what doesn't. Beyond whether its affordable for us to live miles away from the resources we need to survive, i believe it makes more sense to look (back, maybe) towards a lifestyle where most everything we need to survive is supplied by the land we occupy. I think we need to use the village as the paradigm for urban planning and development. Beyond the ecological concerns, this keeps natures checks and balances in order. This means choosing reasonable sites on which to build as well.
But as the planet becomes overpopulated and we become more sophisticated in our tastes and technologies, that becomes less and less likely. To me, sustainability and a healthy respect for the preservation of natural order are synonymous. Our ancestors (most of them anyway) existed within, and respected, the natural order because they had to and it served them well.
As its already been pointed out, economics are what drives our decisions about development and not sustainabilty. We're presently doing all kinds of things that will need reparation and rethinking in the future, and urban sprawl is just one of them. If you want me, I'll be in my teepee.
Sumit Khanna on Aug. 19, 2008
The downtown of Chattanooga is really pathetic compared to other cities. We have fewer and fewer places of business. It's currently very expensive to work and live downtown compared to living out in Hixson, Soddy, etc. Our public transportation system is a joke and the last time I heard a speaker from the Chamber of Commerce at a YPAC luncheon, they did not bring up any plans to revamp mass-transit and instead told people they are trying to encourage people to live closer to where they work.
There is an excellent documentary called "The End of Suburbia" which pains an inconveniently realistic picture of where suburbia is headed and how to avoid it.