Lynne B. Sagalyn

Public/Private Development: Lessons from History, Research, and Practice

Abstract Public/private partnerships have become a favored strategy for implementing complex urban developments in the United States and Western Europe, but the large volume of literature on the topic falls short of providing city planners, development experts, and policy analysts the knowledge needed for either teaching or practice. In the late 1970s, the blurring of lines between public and private action spurred significant intellectual debate in the U.S. literature, and concern that those financing and carrying out public/ private projects had too much influence compared to those who would ultimately pay for or be affected by the projects. As a consequence, the early literature on public/private development projects in the United States did little to enlighten. This has been changing, however, and academic literature from abroad has used inventive means to analyze public/private developments and generalize about their impacts and significance. I synthesize the case-based research on public/private development projects to extract insights and lessons for planning, deal making, and performance, concluding by recommending the additional research that I consider most needed.

Negotiating for Public Benefits: The Bargaining Calculus of Public-Private Development

US cities capture public benefits from private developers under several bargaining frameworks: exactions, incentive zoning and public-private developments. These frameworks exist along a continuum of policy-intervention strategies, from passive regulation to active development, from a quid pro quo to incentive to investment policy posture. Each strategy defines a public position, structure and process for negotiation and parameters for the bargaining process. Though the means differ, the common element is that each strategy calls upon private development to support the costs of the public-benefit package. During the 1980s, American cities succeeded in tapping this wellspring of private development in an unparallelled way through active public development. To secure these benefits, the policy strategy demanded that cities take on significantly greater risk to achieve their planning objectives. With a strong real estate market in their favour, both San Francisco and Los Angeles negotiated aggressive business deals to fund their public-amenities agendas. A key difference in the approaches can be explained by their respective attitudes towards risk-taking and control, attitudes which reflected differences in political culture. Whether to build the public amenities directly (San Francisco) or require their provision by developers (Los Angeles) remains a matter of judgement, its relative desirability conditional on the priorities, politics and risk tolerance of individual cities and their develop ment agencies. Experience varies and expertise matters.

Explaining the Improbable Local Redevelopment in the Wake of Federal Cutbacks

Abstract Federal cutbacks in urban aid in the 1970s forced cities to finance redevelopment projects with their own resources. Freed from federal rules and regulations, cities responded with invention, devising new financial strategies that proved to be powerful alternatives to direct federal aid. The process that fostered the solutions—public-private dealmaking—transformed the nature of city development practice, raising with it troublesome issues of accountability. This article describes these financial strategies and the nature of public subsidies in the deals. Then it argues that the accountability problem poses a policy dilemma that makes it a hard target of reform.

Downtown malls and the city agenda

A shopping mall, new office towers, a convention center, an atrium hotel, a restored historic neighborhood. These are the civic agenda for downtown development in the last third of the twentieth century, a trophy collection that mayors want. Add a domed stadium, aquarium, or cleaned-up waterfront to suit the circumstances, and you have the essential equipment for a first-class American city. The showpieces on this list are useful as well as trendy. They help a city keep up with its competitors while also meeting some local need such as getting rid of an eyesore, saving a landmark, or creating a civic symbol. Although the projects rarely result from systematic forethought, they often fit together surprisingly well. Most serve a common function: restoring downtown as a center of economic activity. Baltimore illustrates the way a retail center links into a chain of projects spanning the decades. Its new downtown became an instant success with the opening of the Harborplace shops in 1980, but that success was 30 years in the making. Shoreline improvements around the Inner Harbor a new bulkhead, a landfill, marina, piers, public parks, and promenades date from a bond issue voted in 1948. Other projects that remade the core of Baltimore in stages include the 33-acre Charles Center office complex built in the 1960s; the Maryland Science Center, World Trade Center, and Convention Center in the 1970s; and the National Aquarium and Hyatt Regency Hotel that opened within a year after Harborplace. This was a costly series of projects, with the public sector bill along totalling more than

Entertainment Centers and the Quest for Transformation in the Periphery

200 million. And although each has its special history, they feed off each other. The downtown agenda was more than a grab-bag of pet projects because of the steady interest of elected officials and business executives in strengthening the downtown economy. Business coalitions especially had a large stake in revitalizing the city center, and their support was unusually crucial for launching any large project. In deciding which projects to push, they usually threw their weight behind those that served an economic development purpose. The dozens of downtown retail centers built after 1970 were part of this total agenda, adding a fresh acrobatic act to a three-ring circus in the making. They thrilled the crowds, but their long-run impact at the box office is hard to separate from the rest of the show.

Book Review: Democracy Deferred: Civic Leadership after 9/11

Abstract The core of the entertainment industry in almost every urban area across the globe is by historical evolution or deliberate public policy lodged in the city center. Times Square in New York and the West End of London are the most iconic of these centers, but entertainment has evolved into new sports arena formats such as Amsterdam ArenA and L.A. Live. Some of these centers develop in the core of cities, yet others evolve on the periphery of a center city. In this quest for transformation, we ask, can contemporary entertainment-oriented transformative projects create “place” and are some locations better suited for such projects? In this paper, we explain how concentrated entertainment centers develop in the United States through the interplay of public policy and market economics, we present a typology for organizing different entertainment clusters, and through a case study of L.A. Live! we demonstrate how Los Angeles created an entertainment district from scratch on the downtown periphery. We argue that these projects can deliver on the promise of transformation with the right conditions and resources nurtured by local planning cultures and favorable markets. We further suggest that the downtown periphery in central cities is well suited for such entertinament-driven intiatives. The dispersal or concentration of entertainment brings nuance to the “urban periphery” conversation where the periphery is not distinct or separate from the urban; rather, the idea of “urban peripheries” encapsulates those places that fall “within” and “outside” traditional conceptions of the urban boundary.

Review: Democracy Deferred: Civic Leadership after 9/11 By David W. Woods

culturally bound to live with their parents until marriage, despite cramped living conditions. In the case of Hong Kong, once young adults form their own households and become homeowners, they often participate in shared equity programs as a way of gaining access to pricey real estate that might otherwise be out of reach for them. Independent living is not common, and young people are typically expected to make contributions to the household in shared living situations. Consistently across all the chapters, many young adults are remaining at home for significantly longer periods of time or taking alternative approaches to independent living. For example, as Lieberg discusses in chapter 6, many young adults in Sweden are so-called boomerang kids who leave their parents’ homes, form independent households, and then move back in with their parents. Similarly, in Bugeja-Bloch’s chapter on French young adults (chapter 10), many young people leave their parental home, yet do not achieve residential independence, as parents continue to help paying their rent. In chapter 3, Poggio discusses Italian households, which transfer housing wealth in an intergenerational fashion through inheritance by sons (rather than daughters), providing free housing for many young adults who are getting married and establishing their independent households. In contrast, intergenerational housing transitions are almost nonexistent in Australia, as discussed in chapter 4 by Beer and Faulkner. As discussed in several chapters, some governments have originated policies to address some of the concerns young adults face when forming households and becoming homeowners. For example, in chapter 12, Zavisca discusses how the Russian government, assisted by US consultants, adopted pro-capitalist policies toward private ownership and securitized mortgage finance markets that have resulted in a rocky transformation process for units previously owned and managed by the public sector and now sold on the private market. Part of the difficult transition was due to the cultural differences between the United States and Russia, which caused many people to interpret a mortgage as “debt bondage” (230). As Lieberg shows in chapter 6, the proportion of young Swedes who are homeless, live in unstable housing conditions, or live in multigenerational households is small, thanks to a generous welfare and support system that includes a nationwide network of housing subsidies. In chapter 8, Zhu discusses how China has undergone significant housing reforms and privatization measures, although none has specifically targeted young adults. In chapter 4, Beer and Faulkner show that in the case of Australia, there has been a discontinuation of homeownership assistance for young adults, resulting in some borrowers paying as much as 50 percent of their income toward housing, which would be unthinkable in the United States. In the case of Ireland (chapter 11), Norris and Winston note that a decline in the availability of social housing has hit young people particularly hard. The content of Young People and Housing: Transitions, Trajectories, and Generational Fractures is pithy and a welcome addition to the scant housing literature that focuses on the younger generation’s household formation and homeownership. The book probably suffers from a lack of geographic cohesion and flow. The editors do not provide a rationale for the order of the chapters in the introduction although they notably attempt to categorize the chapters within sections according to three major categories: (a) family and demographic shifts, (b) housing affordability, and (c) economic change and generational fractures. Also, the editors could have discussed the United States, Canada, the Middle East, and South Africa to enrich the discussion; however, those countries were curiously not included. However, this categorization appears to be somewhat unnecessary since all of the chapters seem to address each of these three elements. Still, as Lieberg states in chapter 6, the issue of “young people remaining at home and leaving home is a special area of research” (119) and is a topic that warrants further research in the future, an assertion with which I heartily agree. This book would be a welcome addition to those specializing in housing demographics and family policy, particularly those conducting cross-cultural research.

Book Review: Democracy Deferred: Civic Leadership after 9/11WoodsDavid W.2012. Democracy Deferred: Civic Leadership after 9/11. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. 196 pp.

culturally bound to live with their parents until marriage, despite cramped living conditions. In the case of Hong Kong, once young adults form their own households and become homeowners, they often participate in shared equity programs as a way of gaining access to pricey real estate that might otherwise be out of reach for them. Independent living is not common, and young people are typically expected to make contributions to the household in shared living situations. Consistently across all the chapters, many young adults are remaining at home for significantly longer periods of time or taking alternative approaches to independent living. For example, as Lieberg discusses in chapter 6, many young adults in Sweden are so-called boomerang kids who leave their parents’ homes, form independent households, and then move back in with their parents. Similarly, in Bugeja-Bloch’s chapter on French young adults (chapter 10), many young people leave their parental home, yet do not achieve residential independence, as parents continue to help paying their rent. In chapter 3, Poggio discusses Italian households, which transfer housing wealth in an intergenerational fashion through inheritance by sons (rather than daughters), providing free housing for many young adults who are getting married and establishing their independent households. In contrast, intergenerational housing transitions are almost nonexistent in Australia, as discussed in chapter 4 by Beer and Faulkner. As discussed in several chapters, some governments have originated policies to address some of the concerns young adults face when forming households and becoming homeowners. For example, in chapter 12, Zavisca discusses how the Russian government, assisted by US consultants, adopted pro-capitalist policies toward private ownership and securitized mortgage finance markets that have resulted in a rocky transformation process for units previously owned and managed by the public sector and now sold on the private market. Part of the difficult transition was due to the cultural differences between the United States and Russia, which caused many people to interpret a mortgage as “debt bondage” (230). As Lieberg shows in chapter 6, the proportion of young Swedes who are homeless, live in unstable housing conditions, or live in multigenerational households is small, thanks to a generous welfare and support system that includes a nationwide network of housing subsidies. In chapter 8, Zhu discusses how China has undergone significant housing reforms and privatization measures, although none has specifically targeted young adults. In chapter 4, Beer and Faulkner show that in the case of Australia, there has been a discontinuation of homeownership assistance for young adults, resulting in some borrowers paying as much as 50 percent of their income toward housing, which would be unthinkable in the United States. In the case of Ireland (chapter 11), Norris and Winston note that a decline in the availability of social housing has hit young people particularly hard. The content of Young People and Housing: Transitions, Trajectories, and Generational Fractures is pithy and a welcome addition to the scant housing literature that focuses on the younger generation’s household formation and homeownership. The book probably suffers from a lack of geographic cohesion and flow. The editors do not provide a rationale for the order of the chapters in the introduction although they notably attempt to categorize the chapters within sections according to three major categories: (a) family and demographic shifts, (b) housing affordability, and (c) economic change and generational fractures. Also, the editors could have discussed the United States, Canada, the Middle East, and South Africa to enrich the discussion; however, those countries were curiously not included. However, this categorization appears to be somewhat unnecessary since all of the chapters seem to address each of these three elements. Still, as Lieberg states in chapter 6, the issue of “young people remaining at home and leaving home is a special area of research” (119) and is a topic that warrants further research in the future, an assertion with which I heartily agree. This book would be a welcome addition to those specializing in housing demographics and family policy, particularly those conducting cross-cultural research.

105.00 (hardback). ISBN 978-0-230-34042-8

culturally bound to live with their parents until marriage, despite cramped living conditions. In the case of Hong Kong, once young adults form their own households and become homeowners, they often participate in shared equity programs as a way of gaining access to pricey real estate that might otherwise be out of reach for them. Independent living is not common, and young people are typically expected to make contributions to the household in shared living situations. Consistently across all the chapters, many young adults are remaining at home for significantly longer periods of time or taking alternative approaches to independent living. For example, as Lieberg discusses in chapter 6, many young adults in Sweden are so-called boomerang kids who leave their parents’ homes, form independent households, and then move back in with their parents. Similarly, in Bugeja-Bloch’s chapter on French young adults (chapter 10), many young people leave their parental home, yet do not achieve residential independence, as parents continue to help paying their rent. In chapter 3, Poggio discusses Italian households, which transfer housing wealth in an intergenerational fashion through inheritance by sons (rather than daughters), providing free housing for many young adults who are getting married and establishing their independent households. In contrast, intergenerational housing transitions are almost nonexistent in Australia, as discussed in chapter 4 by Beer and Faulkner. As discussed in several chapters, some governments have originated policies to address some of the concerns young adults face when forming households and becoming homeowners. For example, in chapter 12, Zavisca discusses how the Russian government, assisted by US consultants, adopted pro-capitalist policies toward private ownership and securitized mortgage finance markets that have resulted in a rocky transformation process for units previously owned and managed by the public sector and now sold on the private market. Part of the difficult transition was due to the cultural differences between the United States and Russia, which caused many people to interpret a mortgage as “debt bondage” (230). As Lieberg shows in chapter 6, the proportion of young Swedes who are homeless, live in unstable housing conditions, or live in multigenerational households is small, thanks to a generous welfare and support system that includes a nationwide network of housing subsidies. In chapter 8, Zhu discusses how China has undergone significant housing reforms and privatization measures, although none has specifically targeted young adults. In chapter 4, Beer and Faulkner show that in the case of Australia, there has been a discontinuation of homeownership assistance for young adults, resulting in some borrowers paying as much as 50 percent of their income toward housing, which would be unthinkable in the United States. In the case of Ireland (chapter 11), Norris and Winston note that a decline in the availability of social housing has hit young people particularly hard. The content of Young People and Housing: Transitions, Trajectories, and Generational Fractures is pithy and a welcome addition to the scant housing literature that focuses on the younger generation’s household formation and homeownership. The book probably suffers from a lack of geographic cohesion and flow. The editors do not provide a rationale for the order of the chapters in the introduction although they notably attempt to categorize the chapters within sections according to three major categories: (a) family and demographic shifts, (b) housing affordability, and (c) economic change and generational fractures. Also, the editors could have discussed the United States, Canada, the Middle East, and South Africa to enrich the discussion; however, those countries were curiously not included. However, this categorization appears to be somewhat unnecessary since all of the chapters seem to address each of these three elements. Still, as Lieberg states in chapter 6, the issue of “young people remaining at home and leaving home is a special area of research” (119) and is a topic that warrants further research in the future, an assertion with which I heartily agree. This book would be a welcome addition to those specializing in housing demographics and family policy, particularly those conducting cross-cultural research.