Bridging Theory and Practice Since 1974

Tag: Election

Planning as a Front Row Political Issue

By: Evan King

The people who benefit most from the American urban environment’s injustices do not usually make a habit of talking about them. Wealthy suburbs are built not just to keep resources away from minorities, but to make this deprivation invisible and undiscussed. It’s no coincidence that high-profile political debate rarely focuses on the built environment – national elections hinge on the support of suburbs and it does not do for candidates to question their inhabitants’ way of life. 

But nor was it common to aggressively support suburbia until recently. To be sure, suburbanites themselves push back against concerns relating to sharing their resources and always have. Threats to property value or the exclusivity of schools are often met with fury. But the Not in My Backyard (NIMBY) movement has in the past been more of a local phenomenon, even if one that occurs in every locality. Sure, people want to protect their property values and live separately from other races, but these are due to selfishness and racism, not some broad ideological vision for how the country should be, shared and propagated on Fox News. I want to emphasize that long-held racism and NIMBYism are just as evil as the more dramatic policies being advanced at the national level right now, but I have always been able to discuss issues of the built environment with people I disagree with far more reasonably than any other political issue. The injustices and inefficiencies of suburbs are intuitive and easy to explain, tax policy or abortion rights not so much. 

But the urban environment is now a mainstream political talking point, if it ever really wasn’t. In July, the Trump administration rolled back Obama-era housing policies meant to bring more affordable housing to suburbs, appealing to tweet-based racist fears about crime reduction and home values without evidence. In the past, an administration might have quietly undone these regulations, justifying it only if opponents called attention to it and probably trying to disguise it as something more innocuous. As with so many political controversies now, however, President Trump understands that making more overtly racist appeals is effective for him in appealing to his base. Justice in the built environment has always been a cause of the left, but now it is fully and visibly partisan whether we like it or not – Not in My Backyard is now Not in Anyone’s Backyard.

This is unfortunate, but what is more disturbing is the fact that left-leaning politicians cannot even touch the issue; to do so would alienate most swing voters and many Democrats, who may say they want a transportation system that minimizes emissions and opportunity and justice for Black people. But at the end of the day, they have a $100,000 house and a $20,000 car and loath to share the fruits of their success when a substantive chance comes. If politicians campaigned more on affordable housing, mixed-use development, or transit, we might not see as many Bernie stickers on Porches in hilltop McMansion driveways in exclusive school districts (a sight I see every so often), nor as many progressives holding office. Meanwhile, President Trump can continue “telling it like it is” and reminding suburbanites of why they are truly there, celebrating this and reaping political rewards.

Perhaps aversion to the current presidency will win some support for modern planning ideas from moderate Democrats – it would only be fair given how much Republicans have united on so many issues. And maybe some change is on the horizon as more and more people find themselves unable to afford homes or cars. But for now, planning is under an unfriendly spotlight – one many of us likely hoped would never materialize. If planning is to stay in the front row of the national consciousness, we can only hope some new voices join the conversation and push urbanism forward.


Photo Credit: National Archives HOLC records (left), netclipart.com (right)

Evan King is a second-year master’s student in city and regional planning. His interests include transportation policy in the developing world, light rail, and freight movement on inland waterways. He can found in his free time trying to kayak long distances and making hand-drawn maps. Evan hails from central Connecticut and completed an undergraduate degree in Maryland. Opinions are his own.

Edited by Emma Vinella-Brusher

Chapel Hill Town Council Candidates Speak on Issues of Affordable Housing and Transportation

Fall is in the air, and it’s time for municipal elections!  On November 7, Chapel Hill registered voters will cast their ballots for candidates seeking four available Town Council seats.  The Chapel Hill Town Council is comprised of eight members who serve four-year terms.

Recently, the local political blog OrangePolitics hosted a live online forum for the seven Town Council candidates.  Participants included Allen Buansi, Hongbin Gu, Ed Harrison, Maria Palmer, Rachel Schaevitz, and Karen Stegman.  Carl Schuler was unable to participate.

Questions from the live forum included several planning challenges that Chapel Hill currently faces.  Affordable housing was a key concern, and candidates had varying perspectives on how that priority can best be achieved.  Most candidates highlighted the need to rigorously address affordable housing and provide guidelines for infill development in the the update of the Land Use Management Ordinance.  

Most of Chapel Hill’s affordable housing takes the form of mobile homes. The land upon which these home are sited is often rented or leased by the residents. But, as property values in the area increase, the land is also an attractive purchasing option for land developers. Understanding the housing needs of lower income individuals will require policy solutions informed by extensive outreach to lower income communities and partnership with organizations that have assisted in affordable housing efforts in the past.  

Additionally, while the construction of accessory dwelling units is permitted in Chapel Hill, candidates disagreed on the guidelines and incentives for the creation of this small-scale infill housing.  

Candidates also expressed differing opinions about the merits of the Durham-Orange Light Rail Project in its current form, but shared a commitment to ensure that the stations in Chapel Hill are developed to their fullest potential in terms of equity and economic development.  In particular, the development of Gateway Station will provide opportunities to develop affordable housing, diversify the tax base through retail and office opportunities, and create important bicycle and pedestrian connections.  Concerns among the candidates included resolving stormwater challenges on the site and ensuring mixed income housing is close enough to the station to provide easy access to the light rail.  

0509_map_DOLRT-withNCCU-blue_160900-1A map of the proposed Durham-Orange Light Rail route. Photo Credit: GoTriangle.

Nine questions in total were asked during the live forum, and responses can be read in full here.   

Remember to cast your vote on November 7!

About the Author: Catherine Peele is a second year Master’s of City and Regional Planning candidate from Albemarle, North Carolina. Her planning interests include transportation project prioritization methods and freight mobility.  Outside of planning, Catherine enjoys exploring local parks and museums, supporting refugee resettlement efforts in the Triangle, perfecting classic Southern dishes and trying new recipes, and spending time with her two nieces.

Featured image: A local Orange County election site. Photo Credit: Amy Townsend/WUNC

What this election means for planners

As you likely know, November 8 is Election Day in the United States. Voters will decide who will succeed President Obama and, with that decision, the policy direction for our nation over the next four years. As our nation’s largest cities continue to grow, federal policy, particularly in terms of housing and transportation, will play a significant role in shaping the evolution of our nation’s urban landscape. With that in mind, what’s at stake for urban policy in this year’s election? Here’s a look at what Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have proposed to do if elected.

12911962044_0c857b9054_o

Transit and Housing in Chicago. Photo Credit: Zach Ellerbrook, Creative Commons.

HOUSING

Affordable housing has increasingly become a major issue in cities across the United States, with rents and house prices rising rapidly in many in-demand markets. The affordable housing crisis has reached such proportions that the Obama administration, to the delight of urbanists, transit enthusiasts, and affordable housing advocates, recently endorsed zoning reforms to encourage new housing construction, the elimination of off-street parking requirements, and mechanisms to encourage affordable housing.

10849029085_875c518389_o

Housing in Washington, D.C. Photo Credit: NCinDC, Creative Commons.

Though neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump has embraced as specific proposals as President Obama, Clinton has pledged to increase incentives for affordable housing and to reduce rising rental costs. Her plan also calls for providing assistance and resources to promote homeownership and coordinating affordable housing policies with improved access to economic opportunities. In an op-ed in the New York Times, Clinton outlined a specific proposal to expand Low-Income Housing Tax Credits to increase the overall supply of affordable housing.

Trump has not proposed a plan for federal housing policy. However, it is worth noting that many of Trump’s policy proposals on issues such as immigration, infrastructure spending, and policing would impact housing in the United States. For example, Trump’s proposals for greater enforcement against undocumented individuals and his proposals for increased policing could impact where and how immigrant communities live, as well as the general access to housing that they have.

TRANSPORTATION

With a gas tax that fails to adequately fund road infrastructure and sustained underinvestment in public transit, the United States faces significant challenges with our transportation infrastructure. Additionally, as that infrastructure ages, additional investment and strategies are required to sustain our transportation network and ensure that the transportation network of the future continues to meet our nation’s needs.

2208275708_a59bb411e6_o

Pioneer Square Station, Seattle. Photo Credit: Oran Viriyincy, Creative Commons.

Hillary Clinton has proposed investing $275 billion in infrastructure over five years. She has promised to fund these infrastructure improvements through business tax reform, though has not offered specifics on those reforms.

Clinton’s plan includes a little bit of something for everyone. Though light on specifics, her plan proposes to fix and expand our roadway network, invest in public transit, and invest in the creation of a “world-leading passenger rail system.” Bicyclists and pedestrians also get a special shoutout in Clinton’s plan, which notes she “will also support bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure—reducing carbon emissions, improving public health and safety, and further providing Americans with affordable transportation options.”

Donald Trump has pledged to spend twice as much as Clinton on infrastructure investment, but has not provided details on how a Trump administration would spend that money.

ELECTION DAY IS NOVEMBER 8

Federal housing and transportation policies—and the funding attached to them—have significant influence over state and local decisions in these urban policy areas. Our next president will have the power to shape these policies and their effects on our communities.

North Carolina voters will also have the opportunity to vote in competitive elections for governor and U.S. senator, the outcomes of which will also impact the direction of policies related to urban planning across the state and nation. Though issues on transportation and housing have not been central to the campaign rhetoric in either race, transportation gets a little attention from Pat McCrory, who is running for his second term as governor, and Deborah Ross, the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate. McCrory, while not offering a plan or looking forward on the issue, claims credit for developing a 25-year transportation plan. Ross, on the other hand, devotes an entire issue page to infrastructure. While light on specifics, Ross’s statement on infrastructure also highlights her previous job as general counsel for GoTriangle, the regional public transit authority for the Research Triangle area. Perhaps transit enthusiasts and planners should take Ross’s explicit mention of her prior employment as a sign she could be a transit champion in the U.S. Senate? Neither Roy Cooper, who is seeking to unseat McCrory, nor Richard Burr, who is seeking his third U.S. Senate term, have made housing or transportation issues in their campaigns.

Election Day is Tuesday, November 8. Polls are open from 6:30am-7:30pm. Orange County early voting sites and hours can be found on the Orange County Board of Elections website.

About the Author: Travis Crayton is a dual-degree master’s candidate pursuing degrees in public administration and city & regional planning. He holds a B.A. in public policy and political science, also from UNC-Chapel Hill.

Featured Images: Donald Trump attends a campaign rally in Des Moines, Iowa. 12/11/2015. Photo Credit: Clay Masters, Creative Commons.
Hillary Clinton attends a campaign rally at Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA. 4/6/2016. Photo Credit: Creative Commons.