Undoing Urban Development to Stop the Downward Spiral

The Pleasance

If you’ve ever watched construction of new strip malls, residential subdivisions or industrial development, you know that one thing’s pretty certain: Once developed, most properties stay that way — forever.

But in cities like Flint, Michigan, which are coping with widespread blight brought about by massive foreclosures, streets, blocks and even whole neighborhoods of now-vacant properties may be razed, returning portions of this 34-square-mile city to something approximating “Flint Forest,” according to a fascinating New York Times story.

Turning back the hands of time could be a better alternative, city officials say, than watching empty homes become litter and dumping magnets taken over by drug dealers, prostitutes, squatters and opportunists who’ll strip anything of value from the homes.

Flint city officials are considering demolishing houses on selected streets even before they’re foreclosed on. There are about 75 neighborhoods throughout the city. The idea is to consolidate residential and retail centers inside city limits to a more viable size, centered around the heart of the city and potentially saving the city millions of dollars on police and fire departments and garbage collection.

The city of Flint is having a rough time of it, reeling from police and fire layoffs and a $15 million budget deficit. Some public schools will likely close. Roughly a third of the city’s population lives in poverty, the Times reports. The head of the local land bank says about 900 foreclosed homes in Flint have been acquired.

The concept of “planned shrinkage,” the Times says, became possible after the state changed its laws so that once properties become foreclosed on, they fall under the jurisdiction of county land banks. Other cities, like Little Rock and Indianapolis, have done the same thing.

Something similar to this happened in my own hometown, albeit on a much smaller scale. An abandoned gas station sat in the heart of town, right on Main Street, for years. As I remember, the underground storage tanks had leaked; the property may have been a Superfund site. It became a real eyesore. I’m not familiar with the details of how the property changed hands, but the publisher of our local newspaper purchased it. He turned a few acres with a grungy garage and weeds springing up through broken asphalt into a manicured public park with a bocce court, gazebo, gurgling fountain and walking paths. Local landscapers donated their time, trees and shrubs. Fittingly, what had become known to town officials as a nuisance is now called “The Pleasance.”

Is tearing down unkempt properties a viable option to control blight? Could doing so on a large scale, like in the city of Flint, transform magnets for crime into public spaces that enhance city life instead of detracting from it?

Tags: effects of foreclosure, foreclosures, urban development

This entry is filed under Economy. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.