Memphis: America's Cleanest City (in 1983)

I was thrift shopping the other week and ran across this souvenir Coke bottle that reads: "Memphis: America's Clean Community, 1983." What happened? In just over 25 years Memphis has went from being perceived as one of America's cleanest(according to a Coke bottle) to one of America's most crime-ridden (according to the CQ press).

Many forces have obviously brought us to where we are now. One of those forces has been poor management of the built environment within the city. I was driving up Hollywood the other day and the code enforcement satellite located in that neighborhood caught my eye.

To my knowledge, mobile homes are not a valid use for land in any urban residential neighborhood in Memphis. This one is legal because the city is exempt from zoning regulations, but is this the image that the city's code enforcement office should really project? There are many vacant houses and commercial spaces in the neighborhood that beg to be adaptively re-used.

Just across the Wolf River in Frayser, there is a perfect example of adaptive re-use. The Memphis Business Academy, a charter school, is moving into a vacant big box store, formerly a K-Mart. Would we see more buildings being recycled for different uses if there were incentives in place to do so? Yes.

If Memphis wants to be perceived both by residents and visitors as a clean and sustainable city again then we have to start thinking this way. Other cities have a leg up in this arena.

To name one, Los Angeles has an ordinance in place that expedites plan approval and relaxes zoning and code requirements for developments that take place in existing buildings. Maybe this whole debacle over at Overton Square might have been avoided if these incentives were offered...

So What if Climate Change is a Hoax?

Over the past week, I have been following the climate change email controversy – regardless of the potential embellishment / fabrication of the threat – why is it so wrong that out countries, regions, cities, industries, or even people have become more aware of the footprint they leave on this planet? The fundamental argument for the Green Initiative is to become more sustainable and to reduce pollution.

Now is the time for our people, cities and industries to reevaluate their practices and address the various inefficiencies that have become apparent in daily life – whether it is driving too much, waste, or even public policies that help pollution to thrive. Although there are companies that exist and stand to benefit from a movement that promotes the green movement, isn’t it especially important, during tough economic times, to find ways to reduce our cost of living i.e. lower power bills, ways to reduce our transportation cost. If climate change has been an illusion by the Green Party, how is this any different than the warmongering companies that induce war for the sole purpose of maximizing their end of year profits?

With the Obama administration handing out $8 billion dollars towards transportation projects that strive to be sustainable projects (This funding will be awarded to high-speed rail projects), now is the time to be progressive in our cities. Sure, the expansion of I-269 is a cause of concern (it will become a precipitous for further eastern sprawl) for Memphis, but if the administration from Memphis and Shelby County begin to target projects that aim to connect the region to the downtown core, it may prove to be a successful formula that can curb pollution, congestion and begin to slow the eastern expansion of the suburbs.

Why is it an awful thing if contractors build with an ideology that not only embraces the bottom line of the developer but the bottom line of the individuals that will own these buildings? Why would it be a bad thing if public housing incorporates many green elements? Many of these technologies are successful in lowering utility bills by making the house more efficient i.e. making sure windows and doors are properly weatherized, ensuring that attics have the appropriate amount of insulation. If people utilizing public housing had to spend less of their money on bills, it would not only benefit them but taxpayers may have to shell out less dollars towards that expense.

I am not saying that all green technologies are efficient or even cost effective but reducing our impact on the world can be as easy as using compact florescent lights. Let’s say that climate change has just been an ingeniously crafted story, doesn’t it just make good sense to keep a little extra money in our pockets or if there are little to no savings but it is a practice that has a better overall effect on the environment, isn’t it worth it? I believe that it should be a priority to address these green standards for construction and especially when taxpayer money is funding the project.

When more cities are trying to create a new identity in their downtown cores, why not have green building be a primary focus of that identity. It can not only serve as an education tool for our children but it will make many of the large, abandoned buildings more viable for different types of revitalization. A commone practice in many of the U.S. cities is to take old, abandoned warehouse buildings and turn them into lofts for young professionals, or even empty nesters. The savings that is created by green technologies may serve as more money being spent in the local economy. Now is the time and if our overarching goal is to reduce our footprint, it will ultimately lead to a better world.

Is a Consolidated Memphis a Better Memphis?

Over the last few decades, Memphis has seen its share of annexation. Annexation is the incorporation of some territory into another territory. Annexation is Memphis is mainly done to increase the population of Memphis in order to receive more federal funds and also to increase the tax base. Areas such as Cordova, Whitehaven, and other suburbs have seen its share of being annexed by Memphis, but none have suffered the backlash that Hickory hill has experienced.

Hickory Hill was once a thriving middle class neighborhood that had retail, dining, upscale residential pockets and more. This was considered one of the affluent communities in Memphis in which real estate prices were steadily rising.

In 1998, the area was annexed after a long battle with local citizens who protested against it. HARTS (Hickory area Residents of Tomorrow) was the leading group who tried to prevent the annexation. In retrospect, it was obviously with good reason. The area now suffers from disinvestment and poverty and is no longer the prime community it once was. There are many contributing factors that have led to the decline of Hickory Hill.

-The White flight- Once the annexation was finalized, many of the affluent white citizens quickly moved from the area to avoid being a part of Memphis. This led to many homeowners selling their homes for bottom prices leading to a decline in real estate values.

- High renter/ low owner ratio- The people who couldn’t find buyers for their homes, rented their homes or allowed them to go into foreclosure. A lack of home ownership led to less maintenance of properties which in turn led to a decline in the community overall condition.

-Thirdly you have the implementation of Hope VI which dispersed the poverty stricken communities into areas such as Hickory Hill. This was a transition which led to higher crime rates, more drug usage, and less stability in homes sales and prices.

And to think, this was all done because of the annexation of Hickory Hill. An idea that was supposedly implemented to make Memphis greater and better as a whole ultimately destroyed one of the core communities in the area.

So is annexation always necessary? At what cost does annexation prove itself to be an unnecessary evil. I simply pose this question because we are living in a time were consolidation and annexation is a huge topic for Memphis. Mayor Wharton stated that he is ultimately pushing for consolidation of the city and county to form the greater Memphis area.

Can anything great truly come out of this. Will the Hickory Hill example prove to be the template for other areas that Memphis attempt to take over? We have too long suffered from neighborhoods going into decline because efforts to annex them have shown to be disastrous.

Why would Memphis want to consolidate and make Memphis larger when it is already struggling to provide services to the already existing population? Our crime rate obviously indicates that our police force isn’t sufficient to protect Memphis. Services for a larger population will be even less efficient.

Many Memphis residents have a bad taste about consolidation due to the image that Memphis already has. Memphis is a leader in crime and also suffers from a school system that is second rate when compared to county schools. The thought of consolidation only make residents on the outskirts of Memphis feel that their level of services will diminish.

By consolidating governments, you are ultimately creating a larger tax base. But what good is a larger tax base, when the economic condition of an area declines due to people leaving abruptly to avoid being a part of Memphis.

As we saw in Hickory hill, attempting to make suburbs on the outskirts of Memphis become a part of Memphis is not always the most profitable idea. Like annexation, the overall consolidation of Memphis and county governments will have a similar affect. We will see home prices decline, a migration of the white middle class to areas even farther from Memphis, and city services that aren't capable of efficiently providing services to Memphis residents.

Before we look to consolidate our governments, Memphis residents should evaluate their city as a whole and ask themselves, “Who would really want to be a part of Memphis”.