Author Archives: legallysociable

NIMBY wins by reducing the number of residential units

Posted on by

One observer discusses how NIMBY efforts reach their goals:

Photo by cottonbro studio on Pexels.com

Sometimes working together, sometimes working separately, NIMBYs have manipulated a web of local laws and requirements—such as exclusionary zoning, minimum lot sizes, and parking minimums—to reduce production of homes. As with any production cap, the result is higher prices for new residents and higher profits for incumbents, and a transfer of wealth and power from buyers and renters to existing owners.

The article places this in the context of antitrust efforts. Local residents and officials are able to operate a monopoly with local land and regulations, thus limiting any competition. Loosen the monopoly’s hold, others can promote and build housing, and housing prices might be more reasonable and more units are available to those who could not otherwise more there.

In the suburban context, one of the reasons Americans tend to like suburbs is because of this local control. They want to buy a home in a community, enjoy the benefits of that community, and then see their property values appreciate as they are there for a while. More housing units is perceived to do multiple things: (1) threaten the amenities of the community – through density, traffic, new residents, etc. and (2) threaten property values.

The author describes efforts in Washington state to counter local NIMBY efforts. It sounds like efforts at the state level changed what local communities could do. It remains to be seen how much local change will now occur and it is not clear how many states would be willing to go as far as Washington. How many local residents would support state-wide efforts that could overrule community interests regarding housing/

Teenagers, e-bikes and scooters, and suburban laws

Posted on by

Suburban teenagers and others have taken to e-bikes and electric scooters to get around communities which often require a vehicle to get from place to place. But now some suburbs have responded with new rules:

Photo by JONATHAN PAGAOA on Pexels.com

In passing the new rules, Elk Grove has joined a growing list of Chicago suburbs that have enacted tougher e-bike regulations due to growing safety concerns. Several communities — including Highland Park, Schaumburg, Glen Ellyn and Lombard — have recently imposed age limits on riders, while Burr Ridge has banned e-scooters from its streets.

Illinois law divides e-bikes into three classes based on their maximum assisted speed and whether the motor requires the rider to pedal. No one under 16 is allowed to ride a bike that can reach more than 20 mph under Illinois law.

State regulations also require riders to label their bikes with the motor wattage and classification type. Elk Grove Village officials, however, believe it’s more important for riders to follow the rules of the road, said Scott Eisenmenger, the deputy police chief…

Under the town’s rules, anyone younger than 16 can ride less powerful Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes without motor assistance, relying on pedal power alone. Like Illinois law, Roselle ordinance prohibits anyone under 16 from riding a Class 3 bike, which reaches up to 28 mph before the motor cuts out. Additionally, no one under 18 can operate a low speed electric scooter.

Suburbs are built around cars and driving. It is part of living in a single-family home, having a suburban lifestyle, and is often necessary from getting from place to place because of the size of communities and limited additional transportation options.

Teenagers are often in a particular predicament. Herbert Gans noted this in his book The Levittowners: in new sprawling suburban communities, what could teenagers do and where could they go? With subdivisions and homes structured around private family life and cars necessary to get places, what could teenagers seeing independence do? Americans see teenagerdom as a life stage of trying out independence but without viable transportation this may be hard to do.

Enter e-bikes and electric scooters. They are now widely available. They are easy to operate. The local infrastructure is set up for cars, not pedestrians, bicyclists, or others. Vehicles are large. Safety can be an issue for anyone else trying to use a roadway.

Perhaps the bigger question is not about e-bikes and scooters; it is about possibilities for transportation options across suburbs. Teenagers may have their own interests but they are not the only ones limited in suburbia if you do not have a car.

The importance of state laws in promoting racial integration in Willingboro, New Jersey

Posted on by

In Perfect Communities: Levitt, Levittown, and the Dream of White Suburbia, historian Edward Berenson notes one important factor that led to racial integration in the Levittown community in New Jersey:

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

What made Willingboro different was the existence of strong anti-discrimination state laws and courts willing to enforce them. Neither New York nor Pennsylvania had such laws when their Levittowns were being built. The New Jersey laws forced Levitt to drop his whites-only policy, and he decided that since integration was going to happen, it should unfold as smoothly as possible. Above all, Levitt wanted to avoid another situation like the one that greeted the Myerses in his Pennsylvania development, which had given Levitton a bad name both among white segregationists, who now saw Levittown’s whites-only promise as unreliable, and more liberal-minded people unwilling to live in a community known for racial antagonism. (156-157)

In his previous two communities, pressure brought by organizations and individuals was not enough to push Levitt to allow Black residents. But the conditions were different in New Jersey: the state had already acted. And the way it sounds above, Levitt wanted to both work with the different context and avoid bad publicity.

Thinking about residential segregation and housing issues more broadly, this approach – adopt state-wide policies – is still contentious today. Should a state be able to pass legislation that then limits the ability of local governments or developers to do what they want? Suburbanites tend to like local control; they move to the suburbs, in part, because the local ordinances and kinds of development can limit who might live there.

Earlier in the book, Berenson describes how Levitt said he limited his communities to whites because he was worried about how potential white buyers would respond to integrated communities. He might have been looking out for his bottom line but state legislation or policies could take a different or broader view.

The “natural flow” of people toward renting rather than homeownership?

Posted on by

In discussing the construction of a new suburban apartment building, one person describes the demand for the apartments:

Photo by George Becker on Pexels.com

“We have seen the rent increases in the suburban market in general have been pretty strong over the last few years,” he said. “There’s a lot of people who normally would have gone out and maybe rented for a few years and then bought a home, are not doing that. They’re staying in apartments longer.

“So you have the natural flow of new people coming in and less people walking out the door for home ownership, and a lot of that is just due to the high interest rate environment and people wanting to retain the flexibility of renting right now,” Devries explained.

Is this “natural” that more people or certain people at the moment are willing to rent compared to own? These two paragraphs mention several reasons why this shift did not just happen:

  1. Increase in rents. This means at least some apartments are available to those with the resources to pay for it.
  2. Higher mortgage rates mean homeowner’s monthly payments are higher.
  3. Renting can offer flexibility in a tight housing market or when people are feeling economic uncertainty.

These are the result of social, economic, and political forces. And I wonder if all of these people who find it “natural” to rent now would prefer to own a property. If conditions were different, would they rather purchase a home, condo, or townhome? Or what if this to-be-constructed building did not contain apartments but rather contained condos?

The “natural” flow in American life for roughly the last century has been toward single-family homes and homeownership. This takes different forms – not just homes but condos and townhouses – and may not appeal or be available to everyone. But my guess is that if the three listed conditions above were more favorable toward purchasing units, that is what more people would seek and developers/builders would produce.

The United States will celebrate 250 years in 2026 and postwar suburbia will be roughly 80 years old at the same time

Posted on by

However the United States celebrates 250 official years in 2026, the year could mark another important anniversary: eight decades of postwar suburbia.

Photo by RDNE Stock project on Pexels.com

With World War Two ending, the United States shifted more focus to domestic concerns. Returning veterans wanted houses. The economy which had been hit with a depression and then global war looked to rev up and wanted new outlets. Americans already had a ideal of suburbia and single-family homes though relatively few people could access it. The population started growing faster again. People needed housing.

Over the next few decades, postwar suburbia took shape. Big developers. Highways. Land annexations. Single-family home subdivisions. Driving all over the place. Fast food stores and shopping malls. Expanding metropolitan regions. Suburban music and TV shows. New structures for mortgages.

All of this required policies, resources, and cultural shifts. It did not happen all at once or necessarily have one origin point in time. Did it start with the beginning of construction of Levittown, New York? Did it begin with a new idea? Did it start with a particular policy (which may have happened before the late 1940s but did not have the other pieces)? How about the invention of the Model T or balloon frame housing?

Thus, we may have to settle for roughly 80 years of postwar sprawl in 2026. Perhaps some group or movement could argue for a particular year. But this also means that almost one-third of the time since the United States started (ignoring the history leading up to that) involves sprawling suburbs. Is this a big amount of time or relatively little?

Trying to remember the farm life that came before today’s suburbia

Posted on by

I was recently looking at aerial photographs of our suburban area from nearly 100 years ago. The outline of suburban communities were there – small sets of houses clustered around railroad lines – but much of the land use involved farming plots. Today, hardly any of that farm land can be seen, let alone evidence of farming life. How can suburban communities remind people of that past?

Photo by Brandon Randolph on Pexels.com

An editorial in the Daily Herald suggests preserving an old farmhouse and providing exhibits and demonstrations can help suburbanites today:

The Forest Preserve District of DuPage County is seeking formal statements of interest from individuals or organizations with a vision for rehabilitating and reusing the 1850s farmhouse at the southeast corner of Greene and Hobson roads…

Our hope is that it could pave the way for Oak Cottage — and a neighboring barn — to someday become an educational resource similar to Kline Creek Farm, a forest preserve district-owned living history museum in West Chicago that depicts what local farm life was like in the 1890s…

Restoring the farmhouse — along with opening the Greene Barn to the public — could help educate future generations about DuPage County’s farming past. We applaud forest preserve officials for at least being open to one of those ideas and wanting to partner with a group to breathe new life into Oak Cottage.

Such efforts can have multiple benefits:

  1. It helps people know their local history. If suburbs are sometimes characterized as “no places” as people move in and out or the landscape looks similar to any other suburbs in the US, such sites can remind people of a particular local history.
  2. It could remind people of a particular connection to land and nature beyond that of suburban lawns. Farming can involve intense agricultural and livestock activity but this is a different interaction with soil and creatures than what suburbanites typically experience.
  3. Land and places go through change. Prior to farming, Indigenous groups lived in the area. White settlers starting in the 1830s cleared much of the land for their preferred methods of subsistence. Sprawling suburbia picked up in the postwar era, leveling the landscape for single-family homes and roadways. The future use of land does not necessarily have to look like it does now.

Teams from the biggest metropolitan areas doing well in MLB’s first half

Posted on by

The first half of the Major League Baseball season is almost over. And big market teams are leading the way:

Photo by Tim Gouw on Pexels.com

Of the top 10 teams in playoff position, seven teams come from the top seven North American markets by population figures, according to the Census Bureau and Canada population sources. They are, 1) the New York Yankees and New York Mets, 2) Los Angeles Dodgers, 3) Chicago Cubs, 5) Houston Astros, 6) Toronto Blue Jays and 7) Philadelphia Phillies.

The three other teams in the top 10? Detroit, Tampa, and Milwaukee. According to one source, they rank as the #17, #24, and #outside of the top 50 most populous metropolitan regions.

A few other thoughts about this list:

  1. Mexico City is the largest North American market. Of course, MLB only has teams in the US and Canada (one team).
  2. Missing teams from the other largest markets: Dallas-Fort Worth, Atlanta, Washington, D.C., Miami.
  3. Metropolitan population may not compare exactly with market size. This listing of MLB market sizes has a slightly different order.
  4. All seven teams in the big markets play in stadiums in their city (not in the suburbs).
  5. The argument in baseball tends to go that the teams in the largest markets have the most money to spend. This could be connected to local media deals (the LA Dodgers with the biggest) or perhaps owners from certain places having funds or lots of fans attending games in certain places.
  6. But having money does not necessarily guarantee being in a bigger market or winning a World Series. One analysis:

Since 1995, 48% of the champions and 38% of the contestants in the World Series have had top 5 payrolls. 93% of the champions and 83% of the contestants have been in the top half of payroll. Only two low-payroll teams have won it all — the 2002 Anaheim Angels and the 2003 Florida Marlins. It has been two decades since that has happened.

The list of losing World Series teams in the bottom half of payroll for the season includes the 2007 Rockies, 2008 and 2020 Rays, 2010 Rangers, 2014 Royals, 2015 Mets, 2016 Indians, and 2023 Diamondbacks.

The small scale of American homebuilding prior to World War Two

Posted on by

A new book on the work of the Levitts – Perfect Communities: Levitt, Levittown, and the Dream of White Suburbia – includes this section about developers building at scale prior to the Second World War:

Photo by FWStudio on Pexels.com

The company had averaged more than two hundred houses per year at a time when just six firms nationwide were constructing as many as twenty-five homes annually in Levitt’s price range. Eighty-six percent of pre-war builders put up two or fewer houses a year, and 60 percent built only one. In 1947, the editors of Fortune magazine called homebuilding “The Industry Capitalism Forgot.” (17)

This is an important feature of postwar suburbia: the construction of single-family homes happened at a scale unknown in previous eras. Before then, many builders built few homes. It took time to put together a block. Neighborhoods and communities grew more slowly. After the war, subdivisions and communities with thousands of residents could emerge within a few years. Fields or woods could be turned into flat land for building quickly. Housing frames went up, the trades came through and did their parts, people moved into completed homes.

The scale and efficiency is hard to compare between these two eras. It is like two completely different processes. The Levitt company argued the new approach allowed them to get needed homes into the hands of people, particularly veterans (but not Black residents), at an affordable price point. Critics said the process led to conformity and a lack of true community. Either way, new communities quickly developed and the processes were adopted by other builders and developers.

The American flag…everywhere

Posted on by

On July 4th, a day of American flags and celebrations, I was looking through old pictures in which the American flag was present. And it is all over the place – see examples below – including public spaces, sports stadiums, schools, churches, parks, clothing, train stations, dams, and more.

A vast majority of Americans within range for a 3 hour or less delivery from Walmart

Posted on by

If Walmart’s rise in the decades at the end of the twentieth century included logistical prowess, their CEO recently discussed how many Americans can get quick deliveries:

Photo by Artem Podrez on Pexels.com

CEO Douglas McMillon announced that Walmart is close to reaching 95% of the U.S. population with three-hour or less delivery, with a 91% increase year-over-year in deliveries under three hours in Q1.

This is remarkable to consider: 95% of over 340 million Americans can be reached by a Walmart delivery within 3 hours. Need something from Walmart? It can get to the vast majority of Americans within 180 minutes.

What is required to make this happen? Numerous locations, including warehouses and stores. Lots of employees and equipment. A strong inventory system. And more.

With this level of delivery possible, how does this change the calculus regarding all of the Walmart stores? Will fewer people visit them in the future because they prefer delivery? Will more of these stores be about deliveries rather than in-person shopping? Could Walmart significantly reduce its store footprint while continuing to extend its reach?