The sociology of place on the California coast

Sociology of California

Department of Finance reported that California had 532,000 more people at the end of 2003 (Fulton 2004) than at the start of the said year. Nothing was new about population increase in the state since the Great Depression and World War II, during which the population added half a million people every year, growing from 6 to 40 million today. There are no indications that the increase would be halted or altered.

But the noticeable changes have been in the locations and the way California's people live. Some go back to the old suburban style, while the rest of the trend shows California as continuing to grow into an urban society (Fulton). The Bay area's nine counties account for less than half (3.3%) of the entire state's average growth at 6.7% and places like Contra Costa and Sonoma counties have chosen the suburban style of growth. In the meantime, the Department estimated that the majority need more housing units in the state and that, since the year 2000, 74% of those built were single-family homes. These units were built in large numbers in Riverside County and the Inland Empire in the 90s until they were replaced by multi-family condominiums and apartment buildings (Fulton).

With more than half a million people pouring into California every year in recent years, city officials and urban designers have begun working on master plan communities as the "smart solution" to ease the housing shortage (Vorderbrueggen 2004) and to maintain land preservation. The construction of 140,000 new homes every year still fell short of the demand by 80,000 of those apartments or single-family homes on smaller lots. Master planning is based on, and consists of, a whole life set-up where people can live, work, study, socialize and find entertainment all in one good environment, affordable and convenient. It provides business services, pedestrian amenities, and that sense of place that is very important for people (Vordenbrueggen). Examples of master plan communities are the 150-acre Rivermark, Shea Homes and Lennar Communities in Santa Clara and the 865-acre Evergreen Hills in Southeastern San Jose.

A new study on the social conditions of California found that its public policies - from property taxation and development fees to planning decisions - favor sprawl over smart growth (Vorderbrueggen). Preferred sprawl policies included infrastructure spending that subsidizes low densities, revenue development, and low-density zoning and wasteful subdivision standards. The study recommended the elimination of artificial financial impediments for compact housing, the adjustment of local fee structures and a fair market test for smart growth projects.

There have been criticisms hurled at the development of Los Angeles as a sprawl city and there have been responses and clarifications in defense, the bottom line being that sprawl is good (Gordon et al. 1997). Among the criticisms was that urban planning should slow down and that the prevailing patterns of urban settlement should change. Defenders of sprawl replied that markets rise because they give people what they already want or need, developers do not get rich by building projects that people do not like and that a city strengthens its tax base by promoting popular, profitable and well-located developments (Gordon et al.).

They also defended the position of LA in that it is not the sprawl capital of the world, rather, its urbanized area has the highest population density in the country, according to the U.S. Census, and higher than that of New York, Chicago and San Francisco, for its small-lot sizes, apartments and high-dwelling densities for mushrooming immigrant dwellers.

The trend is for people to choose to live away from commercial areas and into private spaces where single-family homes are made available by sprawl projects and convenient by mobility and accessibility by private automobile units (Gordon). It must, however, be noticed that the lifestyle is not peculiar to California or to the U.S. Nor imposed by adverse American policies, because sub-urbanization is global. It is also happening in Canada without mortgage interest tax deductions, in Seoul with high gasoline taxes and in Mexico with big subway subsidies. Compact development has not been objected to in relation to traffic congestion (Gordon), because higher densities meant greater congestion.

Air quality was also questioned in connection with California's rapid growth in the 80s. But sprawl opponents maintained that air quality in California, particularly in Los Angeles, had been improving dramatically every year, even during peak growths in the 80s. Smog alerts were less recently than in 1977, according to them. They continue to suggest that more compact development could affect air quality only minimally because automobile trips are shortened and less frequent (Gordon). It will be emphasized that almost two-thirds of automobile pollution has to do with starting and stopping, the cold start and the hot soak.

It is quite a different thing now with the telecommunications revolution that allows jobs to be brought home or follow people where they live (Gordon), rather than people moving to where the jobs were in the past. Today, an increasing number of mobile households choose to live in high-amenity-low density settings and most of the job growth is in the rural areas. This appears to be the trend, although still quite a number are in the urban areas (Gordon).

California Business, Housing and Transportation Secretary Sunne McPeak urged for greater mobility and more sufficient workforce housing with the right environment in using smart growth (Metro Investment Report 2004). In an interview, he stressed the need to understand the role and position of schools as a key strategy in improving the neighborhood and that the objectives should be prosperous economy, quality environment and social equity. With $2.9 billion left from the 2000 Transportation and Congestion Relief Program to finance 141 road and transit projects in California, the Secretary said she and her department were still qualifying projects for restored funding when the economy improved. The criteria would be the number and kinds of jobs they could generate immediately and in the long run and how the projects would address the housing needs of an increasing population and its job needs after transportation improvement had been completed (Metro Investment Report).