New and Old #198
Friday roundup and commentary
Is Richmond Turning Into the New Bedroom Community for DC Workers?, Washingtonian, Mimi Montgomery, February 14, 2023
And I thought Fredericksburg was kind of the outer edge here!
Richmond saw a huge rise in the number of Northern Virginia residents who relocated during Covid: There was a 36 percent increase in the average number of NoVA transplants to Richmond during 2020 and 2021 compared to the time between 2012 to 2019, Axios reports. This comes as train ridership between Richmond and DC increased 26 percent from July 2019 to July 2022, Axios also found, and as the Richmond area’s population grew quicker than NoVA’s for two years straight, according to University of Virginia research—the first time that’s happened since this data’s been collected.
I can hear the folks saying “See, we don’t need to build housing in Northern Virginia, people are moving to Richmond!” That’s like saying “We don’t need to open the restaurant, nobody’s lining up to eat.” But anyway.
Look who our broken housing market is chasing away:
These people are mostly priced-out young families looking for a bigger house or first-time buyers, Maraghy says, and while some are working fully remote, others plan to drive to Washington or take the train weekly or monthly to report in for work. Most of these transplants come from Northern Virginia or DC proper, says Maraghy, not Maryland.
Not good.
Of course, more people—and more people coming from more expensive areas—could drive up Richmond’s housing costs. “It’s a Catch-22,” says Totman. “Part of me thinks I want them to keep coming because, obviously, I’m going to make more money. At the same time, the more people come, the higher the prices go.”
That being said: Is it possible that Richmond could become known as a bedroom community for DC workers the way a Reston or a Gaithersburg is now? “Absolutely,” says Maraghy.
Wow.
Why Astoria, Oregon never became a major city, Geoff Gibson, December 30, 2024
Today, Seattle and Portland dominate the Pacific Northwest, with populations of 4 million and 2.5 million, respectively. Astoria, in contrast, remains a small coastal town with just 10,000 residents. While Astoria’s history as the region’s earliest American settlement is significant, its geographic and economic challenges ultimately prevented it from becoming the Pacific Northwest’s major city.
Obviously Astoria will never become a major city in the same way that Seattle and Portland have. But at one point in time, it very well could have. And that’s fun to think about!
This is a really interesting piece analyzing why those two cities grew, and this one didn’t. There are identifiable reasons, largely to do with the usefulness of the nearby ports. But there’s obviously an element of randomness and chance, too. If the outcome had been different, you could identify seemingly germane reasons for that outcome, too.
This also ties into my thing I say, that there’s no fundamental distinction between a “town” and a “city”; they’re the same thing, but we just give them different names at different sizes. We know this, because many of our “towns” might have been “cities” if we reran history, and vice versa.
Where should we build new towns?, Yes and Grow, Ben Hopkinson Dec 11, 2024
For the first time in 50 years, there is a national commitment to building a new generation of new towns. With the severity of Britain’s housing shortage, this is exciting news. But as history shows us, the location of new towns is critical to them growing into prosperous and liveable communities. Trying to create self-sufficient new towns far from existing successful cities has failed before (see the case of Skelmersdale) and would fail again.
This is in England, so the history is a little different, but the same is broadly true here. Many “new towns” have been successful, but have failed to really be distinct places, and are mostly just part of the general suburban sprawl today.
It’s one thing to identify this, and another to have it actually happen:
When house prices are much higher in an area than the cost of building a new home, every additional house you build there unlocks a large amount of value.
This is value that can be spent in all sorts of ways. It could be spent on infrastructure, such as a new railway station in the town, a new tramway, or a new motorway junction. It could be spent on greenery and making the new town’s public parks lovely places. It could be spent on building more non-market rate housing, such as social housing or improved temporary accommodation. It could be spent making the local public services the best in the country so that the new town is a fantastic place to live.
Read the whole piece for more analysis on new towns, but I want to make a note of that first line: “When house prices are much higher in an area than the cost of building a new home, every additional house you build there unlocks a large amount of value.” That’s the opposite of the received idea that construction in affluent places is a negative and ruins the place, or whatever NIMBYs say. In some ways the biggest hump to get over is just the assumption that growth is a thing to be, at best, tolerated. Then it might be easier to imagine how to do it well.
Today, there are numerous locations in the District that can be seen as monuments to foreign policy: places where personal friendships blossomed, influencing the course of world events, or where backroom deals reshaped the map. Although the buildings no longer exist, due to renewal projects, it is good to remember how visitors to these locales clarified historic moments, such as when a country lost its sovereignty and another country was created.
Interesting history/architecture mashup. Give it a read!
Related Reading:
Thank you for reading! Please consider upgrading to a paid subscription to help support this newsletter. You’ll get a weekly subscribers-only piece, plus full access to the archive: over 1,100 pieces and growing. And you’ll help ensure more like this!
The article about Astoria was fascinating, but I hate it when writers make specious comparisons perhaps for “effect.” The arguments for the growth of Seattle and Portland leaving Astoria behind are interesting and valid, but his population comparisons are not: he compares the “town” of Astoria with the expansive populations of Seattle and Portland’s entire metropolitan areas. The cities themselves are on the order of 760,000 and 640,000 respectively. That does not invalidate his analysis, but it could be misleading.
The piece about Astoria got me thinking about cities I knew. I concluded that cities and businesses grow from a port or a portage. A place where you have to pause and decide between routes, or change from boat to carriage, or carry your stuff between two parts of a river.
A similar example in my home area was Atchison. It was going to be the gateway to the West, but KC took over quickly, perhaps because KC is a two-way decision point. Atchison was a one-way decision, from steamboat to wagon, KC needed two decisions. Get out and switch to a wagon, or switch to a different steamboat to go up the Kaw before hitting land.
https://polistrasmill.com/2025/01/02/the-corner-store/