Archive for the ‘Housing’ Category

What can we learn from Hazelton, ND?

February 17th, 2010

“Did you hear the story on the radio about Hazelton, ND?” 

Those were the first words Lindsey shared with me yesterday morning as we hopped into a car before heading out on our day trek across South Dakota yesterday.  I hadn’t, so Lindsey explained. 

A family had moved from Miami, FL to Hazeton, ND (pop. 240) four years ago to take advantage of an incentive package for new residents.  Two housing lots and $20,000 were given to this family of four to move to the ND community.  The family started a business (which has since closed) and moved into a new house, excited by the opportunity to move from a crime laden, urban neighborhood.

Now four years later, they are ready to move back.  Not because of the much maligned North Dakota winter; but because they felt the community had given them the cold shoulder.  Michael Tristani, the father in the family, is quoted in the article saying, “It hasn’t been easy. No one really wants new people here.”  (source:  James MacPherson, “Small-town life fails to live up,” Associated Press via Yahoo News, Feb. 15, 2010)

Hearing Lindsey describe this story almost caused me to turn around and skip the meeting we were driving to.  Needless to say, she didn’t let me, and I was finally able to read the story this morning and learned that it’s being discussed all over the blogosphere. (see links at the bottom) .

Rather than focus on the details of situation, I’d like to offer some thoughts about what I think rural communities can learn from the story.  As I write, however, I want to be clear that I am not passing judgment on either the Hazelton community or the Tristani family.  None of us, as outsiders, will ever know the complete story. 

What can we learn from Hazelton?

1) Don’t assume that newcomers will know how to live in your small town. That concept crossed my radar a couple years ago in a book titled Get Urban. (I wrote extensively about it here.) The book’s author, an urban enthusiast, developed his thesis around the concept that many people who move to urban, downtown environments don’t recognize the nuances of life in the city. Their mental models are so tightly fashioned around living in suburbia that they think they have to drive out to suburbs to buy their groceries at Walmart, rather than stopping off at the local grocery while walking home from work. My guess is that we’ve all seen numerous more serious examples of this play out in our rural communities. But what have we done to help these newcomers?

2) Develop a “hosting concept” as a part of your community’s marketing plan. I touched on this over a year ago when I wrote a post titled “What if Starbuck’s marketed like a rural community?” A fun, insightful video embedded in the post pokes fun at how churches welcome new members. The point being, Starbucks wouldn’t be in business if its marketing strategy didn’t include efforts to “welcome” new customers; so why should churches expect anything different? I’d contend the same principle applies to rural communities; why spend money advertising your community if you don’t have a strategy to make people want to stay? At the Rural Learning Center, we’ve been developing a more robust “hosting concept,” which I’ll describe sometime in the near future.

3) Accept the mantra “The customer is always right.” I think communities who develop programs like this must be prepared to treat it like a business. The town is the product, the community is the owner, and the new resident is the customer. If the customer is upset, figure out why and do something to fix it - because the customer is always right. At the same time, most business owners will tell you that sometimes the customer may not be worth the headaches they create, and you have to find a way to let them go.

4) It’s about the relationship. For a long time, I was conflicted over the concept of offering incentives to people moving to rural communities. On one hand it feels like the strategy of offering incentives to businesses to move small, rural communities; maybe they come, but will they stay? On the other hand I appreciate the moxie of a small town who is willing to try to do something about their future. What I’ve come to believe is that the decision about offering incentives to recruit businesses and recruit people is a community-by-community decision. There’s no universal right or wrong. The chance of the initiative succeeding, however, is probably dependent on the ability of residents to build a relationship with the newcomers. Incentives may open the door, but the bonds of friendship are lasting.

5) What about the people who don’t receive incentives? This case is drawing a lot of attention, but my question is, “has your community been paying serious attention to the people who already live in your community?” My point is, try to make sure that everyone is satisfied. If you gain two new residents, but lose four current residents, you are destined to fail. Pay attention to the people who are living in your community now, and when someone leaves, have a conversation with them about why. And try to dig in deep–often the first response will not be the real reason.

There are a lot of stereotypes being thrown around in this story that worry me.  That might be worth discussing later.

Stereotypes aside, however, the story provides a good lesson for all rural communities.  If we want to grow our population, we have to get serious about how we interact with newcomers.  Hazelton is probably no better or worse than other rural communities, and there’s definitely more to the story than was reported.  They just made the headlines today.  Hopefully, your community is doing something to make sure it doesn’t make the news tomorrow — at least not in this way.

 

Other article related to this story

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Community Engagement, Economic Development, Housing, Rural | Comments (6)

Quantity-Quality-Cost, Which do you choose?

December 28th, 2009

Note: Morgan Andenas is back with us from Montana State during her winter break.  Many of you will remember her blog posts from this summer when she focused on architectural and design issues.  Welcome back Morgan. 

As an architecture student, we study how the character of a place helps to define and shape the homes, buildings, and businesses surrounding it.  The way the land is formed, whether it is mountains, prairies or woodlands, influences the shapes of buildings.  In the same way, the people’s attitudes about themselves and about a place influence the way buildings are designed.

A friend asked me to design a forever-home for her and her husband on his family’s ranch, one in which they will live, well, forever.  They wanted a house at or under 2200sq. feet with two bedrooms, one maybe two bathrooms, a lofted office, and enough room for a 14 foot dining table and lots of space for entertaining his large family.  I thought to myself, no problem, that’s easy enough.  That was before I tried to design it.  The bedrooms and living room ended up being too big and looked uncomfortable, even though they were average sized rooms. 

That’s when I realized “average” size applied to large suburban lifeless McMansions.  This type of house is what Sarah Susanka writes against in her book, The Not So Big House by Sarah Susanka (Taunton Press, 2001).  She describes the early 2000s housing boom as,

So many houses, so big with so little soul.  Our suburbs are filled with houses that are bigger than ever.  But are bigger houses really better?  Are the dreams that build them bigger or is it simply that there seems to be no alternative?  Americans are searching for homes in unprecedented numbers.  Yet when we look, the only tools we seem to have are those we find in the real estate listings.  But a house is more that square footage and the number of beds and baths.  In one of the wealthiest societies ever, many people are deeply dissatisfied with their most expensive purchase. ”

 

Quality vs. Quantity

I started reading her book and it all became clear.  It wasn’t about making a McMansion big enough to house 25 people, it was about providing a home for the two people living there, and an opportunity to host the other 23 several times a year for parties.  It was about deciding that when cost is a set number, quality and quantity are your two variables.  You can choose to have a higher quality house with a smaller footprint that is more responsive to your needs, or you can choose to have more square footage with less quality and spaces that are more generic.  For this couple, it was about quality.

When I start thinking about my forever-home, I want it to be in a rural setting where people are not out to impress, but to welcome.   In both my home and my future children’s hometown, I want it to be a place that will feel cozy, welcoming and comfortable.  I don’t want it feel like a typical McMansion: cold, extra large and built to impress its occupants and visitors.

Susanka says that she is not out to sell everyone a small house, and I’m not out to get everyone to live in a small town.  But, I do want to illustrate that not everyone is happy in that comfortless house or that impersonal city.  Just because you can afford to buy and maintain that massive house, does not mean you are happy.  What does make me happy is attention to detail and feeling like I belong to something bigger than myself.  For me, a small town does just that.  For me, living in a rural community gives me the best ratio of the Quantity-Quality-Cost triangle.  In this specific triangle, cost and quantity may be lower, but the quality is worth the quantity sacrifice. 

This massive house was built to impress, not welcome, with its soaring roof and columns and manicured lawn.

This massive house was built to impress, not welcome, with its soaring roof and columns and manicured lawn.

This home was built on a more human scale with a one story roof line. This, plus the wilderness beyond, makes it much more welcoming.

This home was built on a more human scale with a one story roof line. This, plus the wilderness beyond, makes it much more welcoming.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photo Credit: (left) Carolyn - Flickr & (right) seier+seier+seier - Flickr

Tags: , ,
Posted in Housing, Rural | Comments (1)

Gen Y and Rural Living: A natural fit.

December 10th, 2009

Gwendolyn Bounds’ article in the Wall Street Journal titled “Green Acres Is the Place to Be” highlighted a small but hopefully growing trend of young people who are moving to rural places.  I spotlighted Bound’s article here, and I’ve been wondering ever since, “What is really going on here?  What is it that is attracting Gen Y to rural places?  (Note: Bounds’ article focuses on urban residents called “ruralpolitans” who move to rural places, but young people appear to be a major focus of those currently moving. )

First and foremost, we need to recognize that the ruralpolitans Bounds describes are moving to rural places because they sense an opportunity for them. Brandon Peaks speaks directly to this issue in the last paragraph of the WSJ article:

“I can’t tell you how many people at work say, ‘Man, I’d like to do that,’ “Mr. Peak says.  “Everybody is looking for the next opportunity for hope.”

Peaks, an Intel Corp technician in Phoenix, sees opportunity in working with his parents on a dairy operation they recently purchased in Missouri.  It means he will escape the uncertainty of the job market in his industry, and will enable him to move from a city that has seen a major housing market collapse. (Admittedly, most of us Midwesterners probably see dairy farming a risky venture with milk prices as low as they are, but at least Peaks will be able to see his wife and children on a regular basis, something that doesn’t currently happen.)

Other rural transplants see different types of opportunities:

It is easy for urban dwellers to see these opportunities when the urban economy has tanked. Losing one’s life savings and seeing the housing market crash have a funny way of doing that. But I think it goes deeper.  Why is it specifically that Gen Y is recognizing opportunities in rural places?  To answer that I think we have to look at what experts have to say about Gen Y. 

Characteristics of Gen Y

There’s no shortage of social commentators who have created their own lists of Gen Y characteristics.  I’ve written about them myself on several occasions.  (See here and here as examples.)    What I’ve attempted below is to connect these characteristics to why people of this generation might be moving to rural places. 

Looking at the trend in this way suggests to me that the movement is about more than just a reaction to the economy.  The economy may have encouraged young people to rethink their future, but the opportunities in rural places that are attractive to Gen Y have always been there.  Perhaps they just weren’t looking. 

 

Other Resources about Gen Y

Photo Credit:  newagecrap - Flickr

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Community Development, Economic Development, Housing, In the News, Rural | Comments (3)

Rachel responds from South Haven

November 24th, 2009

We’ve placed a little focus on Michigan lately.  Last week, Randy offered some thoughts about his work at the Summit:09 conference  in South Haven, Michigan.  This week Rachel Vochaska, Executive Director of the South Haven Area Chamber of Commerce shares some of her thoughts the event as well as the community’s plans to spur entrepreneurship. 

 

Interview with Rachel Vochaska

We’ve been hearing a lot about Michigan in the news over the last year, but most of the news focuses on Detroit and the collapse of the automobile industry.  What is happening in South Haven and other rural communities in Michigan? 

While the South Haven area has a well diversified manufacturing base, it has been impacted by the collapse of the auto industry and the community has suffered a significant loss of jobs.  Over a period of close to 24 months, Nobel International closed two local plants with 250 employees each.  To our favor though, the diverse nature of manufacturing in the area coupled with a number of companies who are engineering innovative solutions provides us relative stability even in this downturned economy. 

At the Chamber we are receiving numerous small business development inquiries and we are providing triage services to best meet the needs of local entrepreneurs.  We have created an inventory of services and resources for those interested in starting a small business and based on the nature of the inquiry we are plugging folks into counseling services through SCORE and the Small Business and Technology Development Center (SBTDC).  Enrollment has reached capacity at our local community college and Michigan Works! is providing a heightened level of assistance to those who have been dislocated or who are unemployed.

We are assisting our second stage entrepreneurs in a number of ways.  We have provided leadership retreats through the Edward Lowe Foundation with the goal of encouraging peer learning and mentoring while developing leadership skills.  We continue to engage about 12 companies in this leadership development process to the benefit of the region.  We have connected in with the SBTDC who have deployed services through their Growth Group to help businesses with restructuring and identifying product diversification opportunities.  We are working with our regional Procurement Technical Assistance Center to encourage businesses to consider diversifying their customer orientation by engaging in government contracting.  Our residential companies are sticking in there, staying loyal to the area, and doing what they need to do to ride the storm out.

Being a lake-side resort oriented community well located to Chicago and other metro areas, the downturn in the economy has actually benefited many of our local businesses especially those in the hospitality industry (lodging and restaurants).  South Haven is a cost-effective, fun loving destination for both regional and out-of-state visitors.  We are working diligently in developing shoulder and off-season events and activities that will continue to draw people even during the slower months.  We are gearing up our agri-tourism sector and beginning to package not just the great natural amenities associated with Lake Michigan - the lake, white-sand beaches, our river, and the lighthouse, to name a few - but also the adventure of returning to the farm or even visiting a farm for the first time. 

With manufacturing, agriculture and tourism as the our primary supporters and our economic base, an optimism continues to prevail and entrepreneurs recognize that our abundant natural resources coupled with our ideal mid-west location positions the South Haven area as a great place to live, work, and play!      

As the Director of the South Haven Area Chamber of Commerce, your job entails supporting economic growth and opportunities in the greater South Haven area.  What are some of the initiatives you are working on that will help you achieve this mission? 

The membership of the South Haven Area Chamber of Commerce is truly representative of small business, with 68% employing four or less employees and 85% of Chamber members having 10 or less employees.  Services provided by the Chamber have been geared appropriately with small business development opportunities through programming and networking events being provided through the Chamber’s annual program of work. 

In addition these traditional services provided by the Chamber, in 2007 our Board re-defined our direction into economic development.  We embarked upon a project to identify the resources and tools available to people interested in starting a small business.  What we found out was that we didn’t lack the services or products that entrepreneurs needed to get started and to even grow their business, we lacked an effective system to inform entrepreneurs about what was available and then to deploy the resources they needed.  We found that small business development service providers and entrepreneurial support organizations were acting in isolation, and as a result of these silos the customer (the entrepreneur) wasn’t being well served.  So we set out with a mission “to provide a supportive and systematic approach to small business development that will spur economic revitalization and encourage sustainability in Van Buren County”, marking the birth of BRACE: Business Resources & Counseling for Entrepreneurs!

 

Last week, you held Summit: 09 — How Regional Cooperation Sustains Entrepreneurial Development.  What is Summit:09 and why did you ask Randy to come out and speak at it? 

Summit: 09 was a high caliber learning opportunity for community leaders, business people and citizens who have a desire to engage in making a difference (transforming Michigan!).  With a focus on regional cooperation and entrepreneurship, our goal was to bring folks into the room to hear about what the Rural Learning Center (RLC) is doing and to continue to motivate the shift in working across borders in cultivating our talent - simply said, coming together to grow our own.  At the Chamber, we understand the importance of economic gardening versus the traditional economic model of hunting (recruitment and attraction).  As a result, the Board of Directors has set a vision for our organization that focuses on entrepreneurship.  We have lead the charge to develop a county-wide initiative that provides assistance to entrepreneurs in taking their dream to fruition.  We are working collaboratively in establishing a supportive and systematic approach to small business development.  When we heard about the work of RLC we were intrigued, and we knew that we had much to learn from the Miner County experience.  Randy brought a humility to the topic and to summit, and our shared vision associated with the potential of rural economic development made him a perfect fit with our program and the direction we are heading.

We believe that it is greater than that though.  Given both the similarities and differences between our communities, we are excited about embarking upon a journey to further develop our relationship with the RLC.  We plan to advance our work by sharing intellectual property and resources via distance learning capabilities.  Who knows, maybe Miner County and Van Buren County will become a great example of interstate cooperation given this new relationship between RLC and the South Haven Area Chamber of Commerce!             

What are some of the most important things you learned from the speakers at the conference? 

Coming together with a vision and a plan seemed to be a central tenet of Randy’s presentation.  It was a good affirmation for us as we look at our own economic development efforts.  Early on in our BRACE initiative we spent a lot of time sitting around the table identifying the direction and determining who needed to be involved.  Eighteen months ago we conducted a very effective Appreciative Inquiry process that laid the foundation for our vision and our program of work (strategic action items), and next month we will re-visit the strategic planning process and determine our direction for the next 18 months.

As a result of Randy’s presentation, we have 2 communities mobilizing efforts to work through the schools by using students to conduct a community survey.  I loved Randy’s Cashflow Analysis and remain hopeful that we can carry his survey process to the next level and show true benefit to our communities relative to buying locally.

With the good also come the tough times.  Randy did a great job of not just showcasing the successes, he was also willing to reveal the struggles that Miner County and the RLC have experienced.  The audience connected at a deeper level in recognizing and appreciating that we grow stronger and gain insight through this adversity.

 

Note:  Rachel offers an interesting idea:  “We are excited about embarking upon a journey to further develop our relationship with the RLC….  Who knows, maybe Miner County and Van Buren County will become a great example of interstate cooperation.”

It is always fun to speculate on where new relationships will take us.  Connecting with the folks in Van Buren County offers great possibilities.  Where that goes is yet to be defined.  At a bare minumum, however, we all have an opportunity to learn from the entrepreneurial efforts being developed in Van Buren County. Through BRACE, it would appear that the folks in Van Buren County are ahead of most of us in this part of the country in their efforts to bring business assistance providers together and create a systematic approach to small business development.   Hopefully, we get a chance to continue that conversation.

Photo Credits:Kelly Weber at Through Kelly’s Eyes www.throughkellyseyes.com

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Community Development, Economic Development, Housing, Rural, Training and Events | Comments (0)

The Community Regeneration, Sustainability, and Innovation Act of 2009

September 29th, 2009

While at the Rural Housing Playbook Regional Conference in Iroquois a couple weeks ago, I heard rural South Dakota community representatives say that in addition to developing new housing stock (like the Governors House), they need to (1) do a lot more to clean up old dilapidated buildings and (2) develop housing prices in the $40,000 - $70,000 range.

Recently, I learned about a bill before Congress - the Community Regeneration, Sustainability, and Innovation Act of 2009 - that could become a valuable tool for accomplishing both.

According to a fact sheet by an organization supporting the measure, the Regeneration Act would

“build the capacity of these local governments to prevent, demolish, manage, and reclaim vacant and abandoned properties through an array of effective strategies and tools.”

The Fact Sheet goes on to list the following as eligible activities:

I’m still trying to learn about the measure, but it sounds like an opportunity for communities to buy abandoned properties and develop innovative ways to get them back on the tax role.  (Perhaps that would include the establishment of Purchase, Rehab, Resell programs).

What I fear, however, is that the measure has been written in such a way that small communities won’t be able to take advantage.  I’ve read several other blogs urge their readers contact their congressional delegation in support of the legislation.  Perhaps rural advocates need to do the same, and make sure that there’s a place for rural communities as well. 

Note:  Thanks to the Smart Growth America blog for making me aware of the Regeneration Act.  In addition to this nice article, the blog offers creative ways for urban areas to look at growth issues.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Housing, Rural | Comments (0)

So what’s going on in Iroquois?

September 16th, 2009

Yesterday at the Rural Housing Playbook regional conference, we heard about a remarkable story brewing in Iroquois, SD.  For the last 3-4 years, the community has focused on a housing strategy that local residents believe has helped bring in fourteen new students to their school.  That’s nothing to sneeze at in a community fighting to keep its school open. 

A big part of their housing strategy has been the development of Governor’s Houses by the Iroquois Housing group.  In the last 3 ½ years, six Governors houses have been constructed, and a seventh is on the way.  That’s remarkable for a community of 300 residents. 

But what didn’t get as much attention during the conference is how Iroquois has successfully developed these home.  I think that this part of the story is really remarkable because many other rural communities have been only moderately successful or not at all.  So what has Iroquois figured out? 

 

Four Tips for successfully developing Governors Houses

I’m sure there’s no easy answer to my above question.  But as I listened to their story, I heard the following 4 tips that I think have helped Iroquois be successful. 

1. Create a good hook: For Iroquois, the hook has been a $4000 gift to anyone who buys a Governors House. This means that a community has to have a pool of money it can use for this purpose and is willing to give that money away. But at the end of the day, offering an incentive like this is just good marketing.

2. Keep your development costs low: It probably goes without saying that keeping the development costs low will make selling a house more attractive, but there’s another reason this is important for Governors Houses. The income qualifications limit the number of individuals who can qualify. If the development costs are too high, the individuals who qualify can’t afford it - even though they qualify. In Iroquois, everyone - from the volunteers, to the contractor, and to the city - has made contributions to keep the costs low. That’s what it takes.

3. Community members need to be champions: If your community has a malcontent who meets potential homeowners, selling any houses in your community can be pretty tough. In Iroquois, the opposite appears to be true. There, we heard a story about a grocer who rolled out his best salesmanship skills to convince a couple, who had stopped in at his store, that Iroquois was right for them.

4. Make sure you have good financing options: Many individuals finance the purchase of Governors Houses with USDA 504 loans, USDA direct loans, and SDHDA First-time homebuyer programs. But Iroquois residents have additional financing options offered by NESDEC and BASEC. The added resources provided by organizations like these can be invaluable to closing the deal.

In sum, it really takes a team effort to make the project work.  And the team in Iroquois has been getting the job done. 

 

                  

Photo note:  The photos are of several new houses that have been built in Iroquis in the last three and one-half years.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Housing, Rural | Comments (0)

Why do I write this stuff

September 16th, 2009

 I have to admit that lately I’ve been questioning why I spend so much time writing stuff about rural communities.  After all, couldn’t I make a bigger impact on the rural communities if I spent my daily efforts working in a rural community like I used to? Could I do more if I were an economic development director in a rural community?

But yesterday at the Rural Housing Playbook Conference, Joe Fiala of the On Hand Development Corp. in Miller, SD reminded me that there is value in having blogs where people can dream out-load, and where we can ask questions that seldom get asked.  Questions like “Does your community need a coffee shop?”

 

What Joe told me

I think Joe and I had only meet once before, so I was surprised when Joe came up to me and said that he was both a regular reader of ReImainge Rural and that he occasionally used a blog post to generate conversation with his board members at meetings. 

Instead of uttering, “Seriously?” (which probably showed on my face), I thanked him and asked how he was using it to generate conversation. 

He explained that he occasionally prints off a post, gives it to board members, and asks them to talk about it.  For instance, a while back he gave them a copy of “Does your community need a coffee shop?” and asked them to think about where new residents and younger people in Miller go to socialize and why having such a place would be important.  I was impressed to hear that they were talking about the role coffee shops play in community development work.  It’s the type of stuff most economic development groups don’t think about. 

 

The coffee shop idea didn’t make the cut

Later in the conversation, Joe somewhat sheepishly admitted that they are not actively working to develop a third place in Miller.  I think Joe didn’t wanted to hurt my feelings, but he was honest in saying it did not make their list of projects to work on.

Far from hurting my feelings, I was ecstatic.  Something I had written had caused an economic development group to “reimagine” their work.   They were digging in, conversing, and rethinking what they wanted their community to be like.  To me that’s incredible.  (By the way, that’s the “U Process” at work.)

Admittedly, I think every community needs a coffee shop that serves as a third place. I think they increase the community’s social capital that will in the long run help the community get more things done.  In other words, community members are less likely to waste their time fighting each other over the projects they are working on, resulting in increased productivity. 

But that doesn’t mean that I think Miller’s economic development group should invest their time and energy into making it a reality.  They may have more important stuff to work on, and should be congratulated for just thinking about it.

 

Ok, I am a little disappointed

If anything disappointed me about our conversation, it was that neither Joe or his board have joined in the conversation on ReImagine Rural. 

When we created the tag line “Building a deep conversation about the future of rural” we did so did so because we believe that generating conversations is key to building a brighter future for rural communities. 

Never have we felt that our experiences at the Rural Learning Center provide us with all the answers.  Nor do we believe that others should be “listening” to us.  Rather it’s about raising issues, asking questions, sharing ideas, and rethinking the future.  And that’s where Joe (and you) come in. 

I could tell from our short talk that Joe can contribute to the conversation.  I asked him if he’d consider posting comments about the importance of third places.  I’m hoping that he’ll even write a guest post or two someday about other subjects.  If he does, I’m confident that his contribution will help someone else who is wrestling with similar issues. 

 

It takes time

I know that it takes time to write comments or guest posts for blogs.  And I know that it can take time away from the more immediate projects that everyone is working on.  

In fact, as I reflect on the questions I posed at the top of this post, I think that’s what I’ve been wrestling with.  Is there value in writing about rural community issues as I do on this blog?  Or should I be spending my time “doing” something as I try to help rural communities. 

Only time will bear an answer, but for now, I’m going to keep plugging away.  The one thing that I am sure of, however, is that rural communities across America will benefit from YOU joining the conversation. 

 

Note:  If you want to join the conversation, feel free to send me an e-mail at mike@ruraltransformations.com

 Photo Credit (top right): limaoscarjuliet - Flickr

 

 

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Community Development, Economic Development, Housing, Rural, Training and Events | Comments (0)

The Rural Housing Development puzzle

September 9th, 2009

If your rural community is “puzzled” by housing development, then you should consider attending the Rural Housing Playbook Regional Conference in Iroquois, SD on Tuesday Sept. 15.

I’ve talked about the Rural Housing Collaborative, and as I described back in Nov. 2008:

The Rural Housing Playbook is about creating a plan for your community’s housing needs and not just building a specific housing project. Everybody wants to see action, and a project does that. But a project is more likely to fail when it is not a part of a community plan.

The Rural Housing Collaborative has produced a process they believe helps rural communities in this process.  It’s a process that I wish I’d been able to use back when we first started doing housing development in Miner County. 

I hope to attend because, in addition to explaining the playbook process, the conference will showcase the housing activities of two South Dakota communities — Doland and Iroquois.  

If you haven’t registered, make sure you click on the link to the right and complete the registration form.  There’s no cost to attend, but they do want to know you’re going to be there. 

 

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Housing, Rural, Training and Events | Comments (0)

Social Capital through the Front Porch

July 30th, 2009

Like I mentioned in my last post, many people see development possibilities as a good way to invest in, and grow, their towns.  So, what makes a new urbanism neighborhood so much better than your standard subdivision?  (Find out what Hercules, CA has to say here, and what Stapleton residents think here)

The American front porch was a great tool for encouraging socialization.  Families would spend nice evenings on the porch, waving to passing neighbors or offering them a glass of iced tea or lemonade and a chair to sit down in.  Before lives were more hectic and evenings were spent at karate practice, people enjoyed a quiet evening together with friends and family.  The neighborhood kids would play together on a whim, and not a scheduled play-date.

Many new home buyers remember this care-free aspect of their childhood, and want to give their children the same opportunity.  From what I have seen, many members of Gen Y see subdivisions and cul-de-sacs as idealistic and sterile places with no real character.  These subdivisions are based on the car with large garages dominating the streetscape, wide roads to accommodate those cars, and are located far from work and shopping, making the car a necessity in all daily tasks.

New urbanism neighborhoods are no longer based on the car in the garage, and instead are focused on the people in the homes.  Lots are set up “long and skinny,” encouraging homeowners to locate the garage at the back of their property, with access from the shared alley.  Roads are narrower to encourage slower traffic, which in turn encourages people to start utilizing the front yard as a safe place to play and the neighborhood a safe place to walk.  In these neighborhoods the front porch is making a comeback.

One of the great things about rural communities is that people tend to know and care about their neighbors.  When neighborhoods are built in a way that encourages connectivity, neighbors and communities start to reap the benefits.  Communities start to build social capital by connecting neighbors to one another.  And, as I have discussed before, connecting new people to others in your community is essential in keeping those newcomers in your neighborhoods and happy. 

 

Photo courtesy of Seabrook, WA, another very neat town that was created using New Urbanist principles.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Community Development, Community Engagement, Housing, Quality of Life, Uncategorized | Comments (3)

New Urbanism in Rural America

July 21st, 2009

 
Many people believe that for a town to grow, it needs a new development on the edge of town.  People moving to town need a place to build, so why not?  A contractor or developer buys land on the edge of town and divides it into cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets.  The developments often eat up valuable farmland, and become a suburban island far from where people work and play.  New urbanism, or smart growth, is helping these cities and towns develop better.

New urbanism believes in land conservation, mixed use development, and pedestrian friendly neighborhoods.  These new developments are built in one of two places: infilling an existing but declining neighborhood, or on the edge of town.  Infilling prevents sprawl, saves resources by using existing infrastructure, and helps bring back life in old neighborhoods. 

When infilling is not an option, new developments using smart growth principles are modeled after older neighborhoods in the community or city and placed on the edge of town.  These lots are set up on a traditional grid pattern with narrower streets to slow traffic, with narrow and deep lots.  This promotes a safe neighborhood for children to play in, pedestrians to stroll, and others the ability to bike to work.  These developments model themselves off existing streets and neighborhoods to help connect with the town.  This helps the development create a sense of self, as well as a feeling of belonging to the city and not an attached parasite. 

New urbanism also believes in mixed use development.  Good new urbanism developments actually have a higher population density than average neighborhoods, connect residents around community plazas and playgrounds, and provide essential shopping (think groceries, hardware, florist, etc.) as well as offices within minutes.  They encourage biking and walking; they build apartments and single-family homes in the same neighborhood, and invest in community spaces.  All of these aspects contribute to a community’s social capital.

So, why do we not see more new urbanism in our communities?  I think one reason is the fact that they take more planning and effort.  I think we can all agree that a larger up-front investment is hard for any community to swallow, whether it has 500 or 100,000 residents.  But, if people start asking for these types of neighborhoods, I think they can become more commonplace and start to outnumber their suburban counterparts. 

Which would you rather live in, and why?  Is there a reason you would prefer one over the other?  This is something I want to study more and would like to hear some input.

For more information on this topic and what our neighbor to the east is doing to implement these new neighborhoods, check out the Greater Minnesota Housing Fund’s Building Better Neighborhoods website.

 

Photo Credit: Matt on Flickr

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Community Development, Housing, Quality of Life, Rural | Comments (0)

« Older Entries