What Greensboro Needs Now is GROWTH: Look at Houston!

An interesting article this week reveals that the city of Greensboro will be updating its "comprehensive plan" for development; and is soliciting public input.  A question is posed to the public: "What do you want Greensboro to be?"

On the very same day, Greensboro Mayor Nancy Vaughan-- suggesting her Joan of Arc streak-- has called a summit of North Carolina mayors to discuss the high ranking of North Carolina cities, including Greensboro, with regard to poverty rate increases. 

Some of us recall Nancy's passionate efforts to keep taxes higher in Greensboro by crusading to prevent the re-openng of the White Street Landfill to residential waste.  We recall her support of all the big-government projects passed during recent years.   

My guess is that these mayors will likely advocate for more statist measures to "fight poverty".  Whether that might include calls for increased charity programs is an open question.  I wonder if they will use the event to try to extract certain considerations from state government, or to take political shots at the Republicans in Raleigh.  That would certainly help them dodge their own responsibility for the situation.

Greensboro has been known in the past for its stringent zoning regulations, its "comprehensive plan", and its onerous requirements on the private sector.  In addition, the city has adopted a fastidious attitude for many years emphasizing "quality" development according to its own definitions. 

The situation got so bad that the development-related industries felt they had to cut an ongoing political deal with the power brokers from east Greensboro so they could get projects approved.   This meant that developers and their attorneys had to give generously to city council candidates.  The developers also had to hire "connected" attorneys to guide them through the approval processes the city has established.  If you don't hire and pay the right attorneys, you can't play.

The city of Greensboro has a "top-down" approach to growth and development.

I find this interesting because I grew up in New York often hearing the name of Robert Moses.  He had enormous influence on the manner in which New York City was developed.  Here is his legacy:

Whether he was building playgrounds, roads, or beaches, Moses believed in a top-down approach to development that implied that it was government officials, not the people, who knew what was best. On top of this, Moses’s projects were in keeping with New Deal–style economics: large, government-funded public works that would boost employment and government power. It was a plan that won the support of business, labor, and government.

Moses' impact on the city was disastrous.  He was part of the reason the city had declined so severely prior to Giuliani taking office.

We have analagous tendencies here in Greensboro.  It is all "top-down" here.  And it's pay-to-play.

But there is a better model to emulate: the city of Houston, Texas.  The city of Houston has been spectacularly successful.  Why?

Houston's growth is more than oil-industry luck; it reflects a unique policy environment. The city and its unincorporated areas have no formal zoning, so land use is flexible and can readily meet demand. Getting building permits is simple and quick, with no arbitrary approval boards making development an interminable process. Neighborhoods can protect themselves with voluntary, opt-in deed restrictions or minimum lot sizes.

The flexible planning regime is also partly responsible for keeping Houston's housing prices relatively low. On a square-foot basis, according to Knight Frank, a London-based real-estate consultancy, the same amount of money buys almost seven times as much space in Houston as it does in San Francisco and more than four times as much as in New York. Houston has built a new kind of "self-organizing" urban model, notes architect and author Lars Lerup, one that he calls "a creature of the market."

Housing-market flexibility has also benefited some of the city's historically neglected areas.

The article does not give sufficient credit to the fact that Houston benefits from the environment the state of Texas creates for growth.  There is no state income tax.  Texas is not a high-regulation state.  Big government is not adored there.

Perhaps the big cities mayors, when they meet in Greensboro, should call for the General Assembly to reduce the size of state government, cut regulation further, and get rid of the state income tax.  They should be talking about what they themselves should be doing locally to allow growth, cut taxes sharply and otherwise get out of the way.  Perhaps we need to be getting rid of zoning boards and comprehensive plans completely.

Decades of prosperity had lulled North Carolina cities like Greensboro into believing that they could continue to be successful in spite of creating a high regulation/ high taxation environment.  But Greensboro's ways have caught up with her. 

Times have changed, and our state's citizens are increasingly improverished.  Perhaps it is time to make a decisive change in favor of growth.

(Another important thing we need to do to fight poverty in North Carolina is to restore the traditional nuclear family.  But that is another topic for another day.)

Update: Articles with more details regarding Houston's success are found here and here.

Comments

[Tommy Seabolt]

That government is best which governs least

You hit the nail on the head with the top down approach to governing. These people think they know what we need, better than we know what we need.

"They should be talking about what they themselves should be doing locally to allow growth, cut taxes sharply and otherwise get out of the way. Perhaps we need to be getting rid of zoning boards and comprehensive plans completely."

Joe, its all about regionalism, central control and the "conspiracy theory" Agenda 21.

When you have a minute, read this link....its pretty amazing considering all that is going on.

http://www.thegoodmanchronicle.com/2013/11/a-critical-analysis-of-agenda-21-united.html

[Triad Conservative]

Tommy, the oligarchy in Greensboro is full of pride and arrogance. They think their way is the best way; and they have done it that way for a long time. It seems they hardly know any other alternative.

[Tommy Seabolt]

Joe, Einstein's definition of insanity fits perfect!

I know that the Agenda 21 link is a stretch. My point was that Charlottes problem is not our problem and our problem is not Charlottes problem along with every other city in the state. Thats where "regionalism" comes into play.

If we the people would turn our attention to local politics like we follow national politics and show up at city council meetings......the council members would be terrified!
"All politics is LOCAL." -Tip O'Neill

[Triad Conservative]

I agree, Tommy.

And the ruling class here would be among the first to buy into the kind of ideas you are describing. In fact, with regard to regionalism, they certainly already have.