File spoon-archives/marxism-thaxis.archive/marxism-thaxis_1998/marxism-thaxis.9803, message 248


Subject: M-TH: Starnes on Blakely and Snyder, _Fortress America_ (fwd)
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 10:16:03 -0500 (EST)
From: "hoov" <hoov-AT-freenet.tlh.fl.us>


forwarded by Michael Hoover

Forwarded message:
> Date:         Fri, 6 Mar 1998 22:35:48 -0500
> From: "H-Net Review Project (by way of Richard Jensen
>               <h4900-AT-apsu01.apsu.edu>)" <books-AT-h-net.msu.edu>
> Subject:      Starnes on Blakely and Snyder, _Fortress America_
> To: SOCIAL-CLASS-AT-LISTSERV.UIC.EDU
> 
> H-NET BOOK REVIEW
> Published by H-Urban-AT-h-net.msu.edu (March, 1998)
> 
> Edward J. Blakeley, and Mary Gail Snyder.  _Fortress America:  Gated
> Communities in the United States_.  Washington, D.C.:  Brookings
> Institution Press, 1997.  xi + 209 pages.  Illustrations, maps,
> bibliographical references, and index.  $24.95 (cloth), ISBN
> 0-8157-1002-X.
> 
> Reviewed for H-Urban by Earl M. Starnes <estarnes-AT-mindspring.com>,
> University of Florida
> 
>                      Gated Communities
> 
> The authors of Fortress America are from California where many gated
> communities have been planned and developed and many others have
> been created by barricades over the last twenty years.  Dr. Blakely
> has served in the faculties of both the University of California,
> Berkeley and the University of Southern California.  Ms. Snyder is a
> doctoral student in the University of California, Berkeley.  The
> book is about gated communities and the people who live in them.  It
> is also about the reasons people choose to live in them and just
> what this means in the broader context of the larger community and
> societal goals, norms, and mores.  The book focuses the reader's
> attention on complex issues.  Among these issues are private versus
> public rights and how citizen responsibilities play out in the
> practice of community life.  The gated community can be reflective
> of society and culture and it can be said that the phenomenon "is a
> dramatic manifestation of a new fortress mentality growing in
> America" (p. 1).
> 
> Gated communities, and, indeed gated and walled towns and cities,
> have been long an artifact of urban development.  However, only
> recently in the western and southern United States, gated
> communities have attracted much planning, development, political and
> press attention.  Such proposals and developments have often been
> coupled with public controversy.  In early 1997, this reviewer
> appeared as an expert witness in a case in Collier County, Florida.
> The case involved an privately owned road which provided the only
> access to a beach front county park and a state marine preserve.
> Public access was assured by a public easement to the public
> facilities.  The home owners association (hereafter HOA) built a
> gate house in the middle of the right of way.  This was alleged to
> violate the provisions of the state and county easements and to at
> least psychologically deter free public access to public areas.
> Considerable controversy resulted and resolution is not soon
> assured.
> 
> There are concentrations of gated communities in California, Texas,
> Arizona and Florida.  The authors estimate that one third of
> communities built with gates are luxury developments for the upper
> and upper-middle class and another third are developments for
> retirees.  The history of gated communities in America is traced
> from circa 1870 with private streets in St. Louis to probably 20,000
> communities in 1997 with more than 3 million housing units.  In a
> recent survey in southern California, the data indicate that 54
> percent of home shoppers wanted gated and walled development.  Gated
> communities are essentially low to medium density residential areas
> with restricted access and generally privatized spaces that would be
> normally public.  The study does not include multi-family urban
> developments.
> 
> Gated communities fall within the American tradition of
> suburbanization and tend to "harden the suburbanness" (p. 11).  I'm
> not comfortable with the author's assertion that Frank Lloyd Wright
> "had more influence" (p.  12) on suburbanization than any other
> architect.  Clarence Stein and others in concert with the American
> Greenbelt Cities Movement and Ebenezer Howard's garden cities of
> England certainly fostered low density and single family housing in
> streetcar suburbs during the 1920s. Suburbanization was brought into
> full bloom after World War II by the automobile and easy access to
> single family subdivisions and single family residential mortgages.
> 
> American suburbs emerged differently than their English
> predecessors. Land was cheap and the primary focus of the American
> experience was to create residential precincts to be safe from the
> crime and dirt of the city, to be beautiful and green and to express
> an ideal rooted in Jeffersonian rurality.  This land use paradigm
> has changed.  No longer does location away from the central city
> alone assure security, so "perhaps it can be found in a development
> type--the gated community" (p.  15).  Additional issues discussed in
> chapter one include perceived reality concerning residential
> property values in gated communities when compared with values in
> nongated communities.  The authors report, "In general, price
> differences were small, and gated communities even had a slight
> price disadvantage" (p. 17).  Gated communities are governed by HOA
> and covenants, conditions, and rules (hereafter CC&R) which are
> often set in place by the original developers and unfold to be
> governed by citizen boards of directors elected from among community
> residents.  Management of the gated community is professional.  This
> reflects a gradual trend "starting with daily life and moving on to
> family life, civic life, social life, and now neighborhood and
> community life, people are increasingly ceding older forms of social
> responsibility to professionals" (p. 22). Gated communities reflect
> in a very dramatic way this trend.  In addition, the trend toward
> privatization and withdrawal from the larger community (civic
> secession) can be styled as "governing by legal contract, not social
> contract" (p. 20).
> 
> This book deals effectively with substantive issues related to gated
> communities.  It is safe to say this comprehensive research
> published by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and the Brookings
> Institute leads the way in focusing future research and much needed
> attention on the rapid emergence of gated communities as an urban
> development practice.  The research is exploratory beginning with an
> extended reconnaissance of gated communities in 1994.  It was found
> that gated developments differed substantially in the housing
> markets served and the sense of community experienced by residents
> within the walls.  Growing out of this work a typology of gated
> communities was advanced by the authors to aid in understanding the
> social, economic and cultural issues embodied in a study of gated
> communities.  It is offered not as a "a firm taxonomy" (p. 39)  but
> as a means of organizing the research.
> 
> The typology includes lifestyle communities, prestige communities
> and security zones.  The gates of lifestyle communities provide
> security and separation for leisure activities and other amenities
> offered within.  Lifestyle communities are often found in the
> Sunbelt:  Florida, California, Texas and Arizona.  There are three
> styles of such communities:  the retirement community, the golf and
> leisure community, and suburban new towns.  Each is distinctive but
> distinctions can become muddled.  The second category, the prestige
> community, appears to be the fastest growing type.  Prestige is
> symbolized by the gates.  Thus the perception is "distinction and
> prestige and (it) create(s) and protect(s)  a secure place on the
> social ladder" (pp. 40, 41).  These are enclaves of the rich and
> famous, the top fifth in income, and corporate executives. The third
> type, gated security zones, are communities emerging as a
> consequence of fear of crime and outsiders.  This is the least
> subtle example of the "fortress mentality" (p. 1).  In many cases,
> neighborhoods have retrofitted with gates and barriers to limit
> traffic access and outside threats.
> 
> The typology is used as an organizing principle for the research.
> Using the typology in the following table the authors have suggested
> the importance of social values which provide criteria for home
> seekers choice.  These criteria include sense of community,
> exclusion, privatization, and stability (p. 44).
> 
> Value                  Lifestyle      Prestige       Security zone
> 
> Sense of community     Tertiary       Tertiary       Secondary
> Exclusion              Secondary      Secondary      Primary
> Privatization          Primary        Tertiary       Tertiary
> Stability              Secondary      Primary        Secondary
> 
> These values provided the basis for discussions in organized focus
> groups of citizens in each of several lifestyle, prestige and
> security zone communities.  The focus groups were guided by
> professional facilitators.  Chapters 3, 4 and 5 serve as summaries
> of the discussions and provide anecdotal information and the data
> begin to portray feelings and perceptions regarding resident values,
> perception of security, perceptions of community life and reasons
> for choosing the gated community.  Of equal importance are the
> relationships residents feel about the host community outside the
> gate, HOA governance issues and citizen participation in community
> activities.  The authors also administered an opinion of community
> residents in association with the Community Association Institute of
> Alexandria, Virginia.
> 
> In lifestyle communities, the exclusiveness, or prestige,
> maintenance free living, opportunities for exercise and reputation
> seem to be important factors in assessing the reasons for choosing
> to live in the community. Some argue that they are involved with the
> outside community and activities within the community.  However, the
> author's survey indicates involvement is certainly not significantly
> greater than one would find in any community.  One reason for
> limited activity is the expression that retirees tend to avoid long
> term commitments to serve on boards and committees.  Comments also
> reflect antipathy toward the surrounding community.  Gated community
> residents often appear to be "cynical about politics and tired of
> paying into community chests" (p. 60).  The reality is that the
> gated community residents enjoy a higher level of community services
> than their ungated neighbors.
> 
> Community CC&R govern gated community physical systems and behavior
> of residents.  The consequences are seen in the clean, green,
> uniform architectural idiom and components of the visual quality of
> many if the gated communities.  Solicitations and traffic are
> usually limited to residents and guests.  The CC&R seem to be
> generally supported and at least one desirable characteristic is
> "lack of chaos" (p. 52) and a sense of control lending the authors
> to conclude, "The world inside is sacrosanct" (p. 62).  However,
> these gates and walls do not seem to create a sense of community
> within, or neighborliness, and clearly tend to separate residents
> from the wider community.
> 
> The gates are denoted as protective barriers of status to residents
> of prestige communities.  Most people of all economic classes value
> status. It is, of course achievable only by the means available to
> status seekers. Household income is a basis for neighborhood choice.
> With the higher income, a family can broaden its choice of more
> exclusive residential precincts.  Personal safety and protected
> property value are also significant factors in selecting gated
> communities.  There are very early gated developments in the United
> States for the very rich.  Near Lake Wales, Florida, Mountain Lake,
> a gated and guarded residential development adjacent to Bok's
> Singing Tower, was exclusive; even to the extent it had its own
> railroad depot.  Other such developments were found along the coasts
> of Florida and California.  People do seek communities of uniform
> economic, cultural and ethnic characteristics.
> 
> It is suggested by some residents of gated communities that the gate
> is not the only reason for choosing the place. In Cottonwood Valley,
> a gated community within the new town, Las Colinas, Texas, near
> Irving, the focus groups revealed some residents sought the gated
> community for security and others seemed to have sought it for its
> "lovely homes" (p. 79).  The gate not such a critical factor.
> Residents of gated prestige communities seem ambivalent regarding
> the community outside of the walls.  One resident of Cottonwood
> Valley referred to people in Las Colinas as the "Over the wall
> crowd" (p. 80) while a resident of Marblehead, San Clemente,
> California suggests, "If the surrounding community has a problem,
> the gated community has a problem"(p. 88).  The sense of community
> and security is not necessarily a consequence of gated communities.
> A resident of Marblehead said, "You can run but you can't hide" (p.
> 90).
> 
> "The fortress mentality is perhaps clearest here, where groups of
> people band together to shut out their neighbors" (p. 99) in
> security zone communities.  It is a manifestation of the fear of
> crime and separation from the surrounding community.  Crime is a
> greater problem for the lower income people than for the better off.
> The incidence of crime in the central city is much higher than the
> suburbs.  As a result, in some urban areas "the city perch, the
> suburban perch, and the barricade perch" (p.  42) are no longer
> necessarily reserved for the rich.  Neighborhoods of all economic
> classes are barricading against surrounding crime, to control gang
> activity, drug dealing and access.  Schemes of gates, fences, and
> street barricades emerge as artifacts of the fear of crime.  Among
> several case studies, two reported by the authors, Miami Shores in
> Dade County (Miami)  Florida and Whitley Heights, Los Angeles,
> California chronicle the development of community consensus for
> barricading and controlling access from the larger urban
> conurbation.  The cases point out the very real physical and legal
> problems that emerge along the way to limit access, even when
> consensus among citizens is reached.  Street barricades and street
> closings retrofitted in existing neighborhoods are burdened by legal
> interpretations of public access.  The political issues can be
> divisive, both to the perch residents and residents in adjacent
> neighborhoods.
> 
> Often perceptions of the security advantages gained by closed-street
> neighborhoods are the only reality.  In Fort Lauderdale, Florida the
> Police Crime Prevention Unit compared closed-street neighborhoods
> with the city as a whole.  The conclusion was gates and barricades
> had no significant effect (p. 122).  Fire fighters, emergency
> medical service personnel and police have found street closures slow
> emergency response time and may in the long run be less protective
> of life and property.  However, the authors conclude that even in
> the event closings and barricading may "have questionable
> effectiveness, community organization and initiative toward
> improving neighborhoods is a positive step" (p. 124).
> 
> The common scheme through the typology of gated communities advanced
> by Blakeley and Snyder is all of the communities "want control-over
> their homes, their streets, their neighborhoods" (p. 125).  Seventy
> percent of respondents to the author's survey of residents in 1995
> indicated security was very important.  The perception of less crime
> in gated communities attributed to the gate reached 80 percent of
> respondents.
> 
> The concept of community, a sense of belonging and good feelings or
> folksiness is compared with the more structural aspects of community
> life: organization and participation.  In survey results sponsored
> by the Community Associations Institute, 1996 (Doreen Heisler and
> Warren Klein, _Inside Look at Community Association Homeownership:
> Facts and Perceptions_, p. 131) the data show that 68 percent of the
> respondents in gated communities rank friendliness highest among
> neighborliness and distance.  The gated residents perceived the
> residents of surrounding areas sense of community about the same as
> their own.  Regarding level of involvement in homeowner association
> governance, the author's survey (p. 133) data indicate less than 10
> percent of residents are active.  That percentage is higher when
> asked about other social association activities. In another set of
> issues, Heisler and Klein sought to identify what factors
> contributed to community problems (p. 134).  In comparing residents
> of nongated communities with residents of gated communities across a
> range of issues from strict HOA rules to apathy, the data reveal
> insignificant differences between the residents of the gated and
> nongated communities. The authors conclude, "Gated communities are
> no better or worse than society as a whole in producing a strong
> sense of collective citizenship" (p. 135).
> 
> America is increasingly divided by race and economic opportunity.
> The authors conclude that, "Gated communities create yet another
> barrier to interaction among people of different races, cultures,
> and classes and may add to the problem of building the social
> networks that form the base for economic and social opportunity" (p.
> 153).  They compound the dividing forces in a nation of people that
> need to grow together.  Many towns and cities are beginning to
> address the issues of gated developments. Planners have often been
> more concerned with public safety, infrastructure and physical
> planning issues.  There is a genuine equal protection argument that
> the larger community does not benefit from the gated community.  In
> Plano, Texas a city official asks, "Why should you say anyone should
> have a second-rate security?" (p. 129).  Balkanization of our cities
> is a manifestation of fear, selfishness and exclusion.
> 
> Planners and local officials have access to considerable experience
> in building better communities by means of environmental crime
> prevention, concepts of defensible space and traffic calming
> techniques.  The techniques for better city building are well known
> and practiced in an increasing number of urban places.  Franklin
> Roosevelt in 1936 made the most profound statement of our need for
> collective destiny.  The authors paraphrase, "Working out how we
> live together is our rendezvous with destiny and the only thing that
> will make America a truly better place, today and tomorrow" (pp.
> 176, 177).
> 
> Planners should and must consider the future of gated communities as
> families grow and change, retirees die and pass property to heirs,
> and surrounding urban areas change.  Cities, counties, and regions
> must engage in serious dialogue regarding gated communities.  This
> book written by Dr. Blakely and Ms. Snyder is a solid beginning for
> that dialogue to begin. In their words, "gated communities are the
> protected zones on the battlefield where the internal ideological
> war over the American dream is played out" (p. 175).
> 
>      Copyright (c) 1998 by H-Net, all rights reserved.  This work
>      may be copied for non-profit educational use if proper credit
>      is given to the author and the list.  For other permission,
>      please contact H-Net-AT-h-net.msu.edu.



     --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005