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 ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005