Click for next page ( 5


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 4
The Evolution of the Urban Infias~ucture In the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries doe] A. Tarr INTRODUCTION This chapter discusses the origins and development of the urban capital infrastructure in the United States since 1790. Urban in- frastructure is defined as the "sinews" of the city: its road, bridge, and transit networks; its water and sewer lines and waste disposal facilities; its power systems; its public buildings; and its parks and recreation areas.) In developing an analysis, the chapter draws on history in three ways: to furnish perspectives on the evolution of the urban infrastructure over time; to point to critical stages, par- adigm shifts, and key turning points in history; and to provide analogies between the contemporary so-called crisis of the infra- structure and similar events in the past (see Stearns and Tarr, 19821. The chapter is structured around questions concerning the demand for public works; the factors affecting their supply; the character of the provider (public, public-private, or private); and the relationship of urban infrastructure to financial, political, tech- nological, spatial, public health, social, and demographic consid- erations. ~ There is no comprehensive study of the history of the urban infrastructure, although Armstrong et al. (1976) supply much of the important background. For an annotated bibliography of works in the field, see Hoy and Robinson (1982); see also Moehring (1982) and Aldrich (1980). Throughout the paper, the terms urban public works and capital infrastructure are used interchangeably. 4

OCR for page 4
EVOLUTION OF THE URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE 5 The model of the city used in this chapter views cities and ur- banization as arising from the interaction of technology and society. Cities develop because technology, in coordination with other social, cultural, political, and economic factors, makes possible the pro- duction of surpluses. Surpluses were primarily of two kinds: agri- cultural products that permitter! survival in an urban environment and manufactured goods produced in the city for local consumption and for export. In addition, cities also supplied services, and these often depended on technologies of different forms. Over time, city growth and the evolution of urbanized areas were closely related to a process of technological innovation and implementation that producer! strong multiplier effects throughout the society. Hence, in the United States and Western Europe, a predominantly agri- cultural society was replaced in the nineteenth century by an urban industrial society, which in turn has been recently succeeded by a postindustrial society more dependent on technology, communica- tions, and specialized knowledge than at any time in the past (Berry, 1981). Capital infrastructure played a vital role in these major societal changes. Economic development and urbanization could not have occurred without infrastructure creation (Aldrich, 1980; Dunn, 1980; Pred, 1966:13-851. A rigid technological determinism or a simplistic demand model, however, distorts the pattern of the evolution of infrastructure. While infrastructure construction patterns do relate closely to swings in the development process and to city building cycles, government has also used public works for countercyclical, employment, and political patronage purposes. The preferences and perceptions of different actors such as business leaders, politicians, and professionals in a particular city at a particular time may be more important in the city building process than a generalized set of forces that relate to all cities.2 For purposes of analysis, this chapter uses four historical stages of infrastructure development related to the process of urban charge: 3 Urban Networks ant! Walking Cities: A Period of Foundations, 1790-1855 2 Cases illustrating the important role of individuals in shaping public works decisions are presented in Caro (1974) and Kahrl (1982). 3 The rationale for the periodization is as follows: 1855 is the date of the construction of the first sewerage system (Brooklyn); 1910 marks (approximately) the beginning of the automobile era; and 1956 is the date of the passage of the Interstate Highway Act.

OCR for page 4
6 . PERSPECTIVES ON URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE Constructing the Core Infrastructure in the Central Cities, 1865- 1910 The Domination of the Automobile and the Enlargement of the Federal Role, 1910-1956 The Rise of the Outer City and Recent Trends Influencing Ur- ban Infrastructure, 1956-1982 History, of course, does not fall into neat compartments. Any scheme of this type risks oversimplification, for there were often important lags in different sectors with regard to adoption of new technology. This is especially true of infrastructure. Its elements have often been extremely slow to change, imposing restraints on the freedom with which economic forces or public policy can reshape the city (Martin and Willeke, 1978:29-581. Infrastructure has thus served both as a force for development in one period and as a barrier to change in another. URBAN NETWORKS AND WALKING CITIES: A PERIOD OF FOUNDATIONS, 1790-1855 During the years from 1790 to 1860, the urban population of the United States grew from approximately 202,000 to over 6 million. In 1790 there were no cities with a population of more than 50,000; in 1860 there were six, with two having a population of over 500,000 and one over ~ million (Bureau of the Census, 1975:Pt. 1, 11-12~. The first cities were sited on good port locations along the Atlantic Coast, providing key linkages for the transshipment of raw mate- rials from the continental interior to Europe. These cities were primarily commercial and break-of-bulk locations that developed substantial manufacturing functions only in midcentury. The ini- tial urban network consisted of a line of Atlantic Coast cities, but by the IS20s a second urban frontier of interior cities had developed along inland waterways, such as the Ohio and Mississippi rivers and the Great Lakes. This latter network largely focused on internal rather than external markets. In several of these interior cities, such as Cincinnati and Pittsburgh, local industries developed to take advantage of strategic location, access to raw materials, and nearby markets. In addition, a number of more specialized indus- trial mill towns grew along water power sites in the New England and Middle Atlantic regions (Pred, 1966:143-1961. To a large extent, cities during this period were walking cities. That is, even the largest cities had relatively compact spatial areas,

OCR for page 4
EVOLUTION OF THE URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE 7 dense population and land use densities, mixed patterns of land use, and no large separation, if at all, between workplaces and residences. Usually the means of public transportation were min- imal. Horse-drawn buses called omnibuses appeared in a few cities, such as Philadelphia and Baltimore, in the 1820s and 1830s; com- muter railroads first carried passengers in Boston in the 1830s; and the street railway, with horses as the means of motive power, re- ceived its initial systematic development in New York in 1852. Only a relatively small number of urban inhabitants, however, utilized these relatively expensive and often slow forms of transport (Taylor, 1966:Summer, 35-50; Autumn, 31-541. Government on many levels - federal, state, county, and city- constructed parts of the infrastructure in this period, stimulating urbanization and economic development. Federal efforts were rel- atively minor compared with those of states and cities, with the federal government financing the construction of roads, light- houses, and river and harbor improvements and supporting canal and railroad projects through land grants, stock subscriptions, and federal subsidies. One author has estimated that total federal ex- penditures on internal improvements from 1820 to IS40, not count- ing subsidies to state and private projects, probably amounted to about 11 percent of the federal budget (Aldrich, 1980:F.~. The most innovative policies with regard to infrastructure de- velopment took place on the state level. State aid to public works projects increased after the opening of the Erie Canal in 1825, stimulated by trade competition between states and cities and ne- cessitated by private capital shortages. Economic historians have calculated that of the total investment of $188 million in canal construction in six states between 1815 and 1860, approximately 73 percent was financed by state and municipal governments (Bruchey, 1965:128-1331. Most of the sum was raised by the sale of bonds to investors, a high proportion of whom were foreign. The aim of the investment was to use transportation improvements such as canals, roads, and railroads in a developmental mode: to escape the tyranny of topography, to form efficient links between the var- ious urban nodes and regions for the movement of goods and people, and to provide for penetration of the fertile western territories. Many of these projects were directed by private-public "mixed" boards, with government acting as "planner, promoter, investor, and reg- ulator" (Lively, 1955:~-951. Faced by the need for development, state government thus acted to reduce risk, provide investment, and supply an institutional structure for further private activity.

OCR for page 4
8 PERSPECTIVES ON UItBAN INFRASTRUCTURE State investment in transportation infrastructure contracted sharply after the depression of 1837, with a second wave of con- traction after the depression of 1857. State constitutional restric- tions passed after the depressions forced many states to a pay-as- you-go basis and to severely restrict new projects. Municipalities and counties, however, convinced that they were doomed economically without access to a railroad line or a canal, filled the infrastructure investment gap. State legislatures passed hundreds of laws permitting the granting of local aid. In 1843, municipal debt was approximately $27.5 million and federal and state debt $231 million (Figure 1-1~. By 1860, however, municipal debt had reached over $200 million, almost as large as state debt (HilIhouse, 1936:32-341. Cities such as Baltimore, Cincinnati, Mil- waukee, and Pittsburgh bought railroad stock, purchased railroad bonds, guaranteed the credit of railway companies, and even made outright gifts. By the 1850s, however, many cities were disiTIu- sioned with the policies of the railroads and questioner! the wisdom of public subscription to railroad corporation stocks and bonds. Con ,30 ,20 Rio loo 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 ,8 40 ,850 ,~60 ,870 ,880 - Local ___ State / / - - - 1890 1902 1912 1922 1932 YEAR FIGURE 1-1 Per capita state and municipal debt, 1840-1932. SOURCE: Based on data from A. M. Hillhouse, 1936, Municipal Bonds: A Century of Experience. New York: Prentice-Hall.

OCR for page 4
E VOL UTION OF THE URBAN INFRASTR UCTURE 9 troversy over the relationship between tax revenues and financial obligations to railroad bonds created political conflict in cities such as Pittsburgh and Milwaukee in the 1850s and 1860s (Booth, 1983:335-363; Holt, 1969:220-262; Olson, 1980:156-1601. In the post- Civi! War period, amidst a severe financial downturn, municipal- ities widely rejected the policy of financial subsidies to private cor- porations. The Development of Urban Infrastructure While states, counties, and municipalities provided capital for the construction of intercity and regional transportation infrastruc- ture, city governments also began to assume many of the service functions that are currently accepted as their chief responsibility. This was a shift from the earlier pattern. While eighteenth-century municipalities provided some infrastructure, such as street paving and lighting, town wells, and docks, their chief concern was with the regulation and protection of commercial activities. In addition, many services that later became a municipal responsibility were handled by volunteer groups or were an individual responsibility (Goldfield and Brownell, 1979:83-86; Lane, 1967:6-~; Teaford, 19751. These patterns changed gradually in the nineteenth century. By the 1840s and 1850s, in the larger municipalities, functions such as fire fighting had become the responsibility of professional fire departments; organizer! police forces had taken the place of the night watch and constables; and urban governments had enlarged their activities in matters involving public health and sanitation (Goldfield and Brownell, 1979:170-~80~. Diffusion of the more mod- ern governmental forms through the urban network, however, took place at a relatively slow pace, with the older and larger cities making innovations first. Structural changes in city government permitted the develop- ment of the service orientation, as states granted municipalities new charters and authorized the revision of old ones. A democratic revolution that erased property qualifications for voting permitted citizens to elect mayors and specialized officials instead of having city councils appoint them. In many cities bicameral legislative bodies and ward systems replaced unicameral councils chosen in at-large elections. Governmental control in the larger cities began to shift from the hands of a commercial/propertied leadership to a new group of professional politicians who relied on appeals to the

OCR for page 4
10 PERSPECTIVES ON URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE urban masses for election (Gluck and Meister, 1979:43-464. In the smaller and medium-sized cities, however, such as Houston, Texas, and Springfield, Massachusetts, the commercial/propertied groups continued to dominate until close to the end of the century (Frisch 1972:241-246; Platt, 1983:96-103). Accompanying the political changes were governmental altera- tions that related directly to the management of public works. Many cities, for instance, introduced standing committees on their coun- cils rather than operating out of the council as a whole. Pittsburgh, for example, had nine standing committees in IS28 concerned with finance, water, streets, paving, claims and accounts, assessments, wooden buildings, canals, and wharves and public lands (Wade, 1959:2731. City council committees, however, often could not pro- vide the uniform procedures required by growing infrastructure construction. The solution was to create additional executive de- partments, a move often resisted by city aldermen. New York City, for instance, in the 1830s had a desperate need for more executive departments, but the Common Council refused to respond, even though the 1830 city charter called for their creation. The council- men preferred to keep power over public works in their hands rather than making them an executive responsibility (Moehring, 1981:55 56). The forces underlying the changes in city government, especially increased infrastructure construction, were more complex than sim- ple economic models suggest. It is always hazardous to generalize about the causation of large-scale change, especially in a situation involving a host of cities ranging in size and location, but some tentative observations are possible. First, it is clear that much in- frastructure construction and municipal delivery of urban services was related to commerce and development (Goldfield and Brownell, 1979:168-170; Moehring, 19811. In this regard, government was serving the same role as it did in providing support for internal improvements; that is, it acted to aid the private economy, espe- cially business interests and real estate developers. Second, a set of forces driving change stemmed from considerations that related not only to development but also to concerns about the public order and the public health (i.e., preventing the spread of epidemic dis- ease). The actors who reflected this set of views included a number of commercial elites, professionals, and sanitarians (Warner,1968:99- 1601. Third, the 1840s and 1850s saw the rise of a new type of urban political professional who based his career on appeals to the recently

OCR for page 4
EVOLUTION OF THE URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE 11 enlarged electorate. In this context, the delivery of public works improvements and of services was often a response to voting con- stituencies or the needs of specific interest groups (Gluck and Meis- ter, 1979:45-524. The interaction of the various forces driving infrastructure con- struction is clearly illustrated with regard to three areas of impor- tance in the walking city: streets, water supply, and sewers. Because they were sensitive to the constituencies interested in the streets, city council members considered questions involving streets approximately half to two-thirds of their time. These debates revolved around matters of financing, the timing of openings, and whether private companies or the public authorities would do the most effective job of street cleaning and maintenance (GoIcIfield and Brownell, 1979:170-1711. Generally, city councils responded quickly to requests for street openings or improvements that served commerce and related to the flow of business in and out of town and in the principal business section. Downtown streets were usually paved first, while most secondary streets were unpaved. Cobblestone had been utilized ex- tensively for paving since colonial days, but was generally unsat- isfactory because it resulted in noise, collected filth, and broke under heavy traffic. I:n the 1830s, cities began searching for smoother pavements and experimented with wood, stone blocks, bricks, and planks. It was not until the chemical and technological advances of the late nineteenth century that more satisfactory improved as- phalt and concrete materials became widely available (Armstrong et al., 1976:66-67; McShane, 1979:279-2811. Residential neighborhoods had different requirements. Abutters decided when and how streets would be paved by petitioning the municipal government. Normally, whenever residents holding two- thirds of the front footage on a block petitioned the council, the municipality would arrange for paving ant! collect special assess- ments from all abutters. If assessments were not fully paicT, costs had to be covered by the general tax func! (McShane, 1979:2841. Not surprisingly, paving was more common in wealthy neighborhoods and less common in the poorer areas. Since the city government was responsible for maintenance, residents often preferred cheaper forms of paving. Grave] (macadam) was most widely used, followed by cobblestone. According to historian Clay McShane, the limited amount of paving in residential areas reflected not only citizen reluctance to assume the financial costs but also a desire to protect

OCR for page 4
12 PERSPECTIVES ON URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE the social functions of streets, common in the walking city, from disruptive traffic (McShane, 1979:285-2904. Changes in values as well as technology in the late nineteenth and early twentieth cen- turies altered these preferences. Once constructed, streets required maintenance and cleaning if they were to serve as proper circulatory mechanisms for commerce, people, and the removal of wastes. These functions were largely a municipal responsibility, and their proper delivery was contingent on funding availability and adequate administrative procedures. In a period of municipal change, the result was a seesaw between the demand for service and the demand for economy and between the private contract system and the municipal scavenging corps. In small cities especially, fiscally conservative governments resisted the public assumption of service responsibilities longer than did large cities. In all communities, however, the normal pattern was clear priorities were largely determined by commercial needs, by wealth, and by status. Few streets in the cities of this period, how- ever, were ever clear of horse manure and other forms of filth. Street networks served not only for the supply and circulation of the various goods required for urban life but also played an im- portant role with regard to other vital elements of the city's me- tabolism the supply of water and the removal of human wastes, contaminated water, and garbage. Theoretically, all these materials could be transported to places of disposal along street surfaces, but only at very high financial and nuisance costs. The two most critical elements relating to the urban metabolism were water supply and human waste removal. It was in these two areas that the greatest technological advances both using the subsurface r'ather than the surface of streets were made during the period of the walking city. Water came first. Until the last quarter of the nineteenth century, most American urbanites depended on local sources for water sup- ply. Householders usually dug their own private wells or used water from neighborhood ponds, streams, and springs. In cities such as New OrIeans, where poor groundwater quality restricted the use of wells, cisterns caught and preserved rainwater. Vendors also carried casks of water from private streams and peddled water on the streets. As early as the eighteenth century, there were both private and public water suppliers. In Philadelphia, for instance, entrepreneurs who built wells on public property to sell water to the public paid a rental fee for the site. In the mid-1750s, the city purchased private pumps and assessed nearby residents for their

OCR for page 4
EVOLUTION OF THE URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE 13 use; by 1771, Philadelphia owned 120 of a town total of 498 pumps. In New York City in the late 1780s and 1790s, the town encourages} new well construction with subsidies and provided funds for repair, cleaning, and construction from a statewide tax (Blake, 1956:3-171. In spite of municipal involvement, local supplies were inadequate to provide for the needs of growing cities. Wells ant} ponds became visibly polluter} and groundwater levels receded. The desire of ur- banites for more copious and cleaner water supplies, concern over threats to the public health from polluted local sources and inad- equate water to flush filthy streets, and the insufficiency of water supplies to control the fires that frequently raged through ante- bellum cities led to a search for nonlocal sources of supply. As cities became more industrialized, industrialists joined to demand a pure and abundant supply of water for their various processes (Moehring, 1981:32-374. Water supply, therefore, represents a situation in which a number of interests- business and industries, homeowners, fire insurance companies, and those concerned with the public health- joined to demand the construction of large public works in order to secure more adequate supplies. City boosters considered water- works as crucial in the competition between municipalities for pop- ulation, trade, and industry and emphasizer} their possession in touting their cities. The first large city to construct a municipal water supply system was Philadelphia, which acted in 1798 because of a yellow fever epidemic. Cincinnati installed a water system in the 1820s, New York opened the Croton Aqueduct in 1841, and Boston the Cochit- uate Aqueduct in 1848. By 1860, the nation's 16 largest cities had waterworks, with a total of 136 systems 57 public, 79 private (Armstrong et al., 1976:217-2221. The larger cities were more likely to have publicly owned waterworks and the smaller cities to have privately owned, many with relatively few users. The large capital requirements of the systems and frequent inadequacies of the pri- vate companies necessitated public ownership. Cities that began with private water supply companies, such as New York and Chi- cago, shifted to public ownership because the private companies refused to provide adequate water for civic purposes such as street flushing and fire hydrants, to eliminate pollution, to enlarge their works in anticipation of population growth, or to service distant districts (Anderson,.1980:119-124; Galishoff, 1980:361. In some large cities, however, such as Denver and Kansas City, water systems remained private until the twentieth century.

OCR for page 4
14 PERSPECTIVES ON URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE The provision of water supply, therefore, especially in large cities, presents a triumph of technology and administration in the con- struction of large public works for a needed service. A capital-in- tensive and centralized technological system replaced a decentral- ized and labor-intensive method of delivery. Progress, however, was far from uniform, and municipalities encountered many problems in the process of development and construction. In Baltimore and New York, for example, vested interests in the existing privately owned systems and the high costs of purchase caused city councils to resist assuming the water supply functions for a number of years (Moehring, 1981:23-32; Olson, 1980:~. In addition to these delays, city councils debated endlessly over property rights and the rec- ommendations of various engineering reports before they could agree on the source of water or the character and technology of the dis- tribution system. Cities often functioned with inadequate supplies at a high cost in fire damage and disease long after the technological capability for improved water systems existed (Blake, 1956:100- 247). Other difficulties arose from the uneven distribution of water supplies. In cities with private companies, such as Baltimore until 1854, water supply was class structured. The affluent residential districts and the central business district received the piped water of a private corporation for an annual fee, while the working class districts continued to depend on shallow polluted wells supplied by city pumps (Olson, 1980:132-1331. In New York City, after con- struction of the Croton Aqueduct, the picture was more varied, and all of the city's lower wards, rich and poor, American and foreign, enjoyed Croton water. City councilmen responded to petitions from residents unable to afford household connections by providing hundreds of free hydrants. In uptown Mahattan, however, the mains only extended to clusters of middle-class or upper-class homes. Ac- cording to the leading historian of nineteenth-century New York public works, a range of elements, including economic, class, and political factors, as well as the influence of the real estate devel- opers, affected the distribution of water mains (Moehring, 1981:37- 51). Until 1860, water systems diffused through the urban network at a relatively slow rate. This pattern suggests that local supplies remained adequate for most needs in small- and medium-sized cit- ies, making private entrepreneurs reluctant to invest; that infor- mation and skills concerning waterworks technology were rela

OCR for page 4
56 PERSPECTIVES ON URBANINFRASTRUCTURE Frisch, Michael H. 1972 Town Into City: Springfield, Massachusetts and the Meaning of Community, 1840-1880. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Galishoff, Stuart 1980 Triumph and failures: the American response to the urban water supply prob- lem, 1860-1923. In Martin V. Melosi, ea., Pollution and Reform in American Cities, 1870-1930. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press. Gelfand, Mark I. 1975 A Nation of Cities: The Federal Government and Urban America 1933-1965. New York: Oxford. Genson, Barbara E., ed. 1975 Benjamin Henry Latrobe and Moncure Robinson: The Engineer as Agent of Technological Transfer. Wilmington, Del.: Eleutherian Mills Historical Li- brary. Gere, Edwin A., Jr. 1982 Dillon's rule and the Cooley doctrine: reflections of the political culture. Jour- nal of Urban History 8(May):271-298. Glaab, Charles N. 1968 Metropolis and suburb: the changing American city. In John Braeman et al., eds., Change and Continuity in Twentieth-Century America: The 1920's. Co- lumbus: Ohio State University Press. Gluck, Peter R., and Meister, Richard J. 1979 Cities in Transition: Social Changes and Institutional Responses in Urban Development. New York: New Viewpoints. Goldfield, David R., and Brownell, Blaine A. 1979 Urban America: From Downtown to No Town. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co. Gottlieb, Manuel 1976 Long Swings in Urban Development. New York: National Bureau of Economic Research. (Distributed by Columbia University Press.) Griffith, Ernest S. 1974 The Conspicuous Failure: A History of American City Government 1870-1900. New York: Praeger. Harris, Carl V. 1977 Political Power in Birmingham, 1871-1921. Knoxville: The University of Ten- nessee Press. Hawkins, Robert B., Jr. 1976a Self-Government by District: Myth orReality. Stanford, Calif.: Hoover Institute Press. 1976b Special districts and urban services. In Elinor Ostrom, ea., The Delivery of Urban Services. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Hays, Samuel P. 1974 The changing political structure of the city in industrial America. Journal of Urban History l(Nov.):6-38. Hillhouse, Albert M. 1935 Lessons from previous eras of defaults. In A. Chatters, ea., Municipal Defaults: Their Prevention and Adjustment. Publication No. 33. Chicago: Municipal Finance Officers Association. 1936 Municipal Bonds: A Century of Experience. New York: Prentice-Hall. Hollingsworth, J. Rogers, and Hollingsworth, Ellen Jane 1979 Dimensions in Urban History. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

OCR for page 4
E VOL UTION OF THE URBAN INFRASTR UCTURE 57 Holt, Michael Fitzgibbon 1969 Forging a Majority: The Formation of the Republican Party in Pittsburgh, 1848-1860. New Haven: Yale University Press. Hoy, Suellen M., and Robinson, Michael C., comps. 1982 Public Works History in the United States: A Guide to theLiterature. Nashville, Tenn.: American Association for State and Local History. Jackson, Joy J. 1969 New Orleans in the Gilded Age: Politics and Urban Progress 1880-1896. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. Jackson, Kenneth T. 1975 Urban Reconcentration in the nineteenth century: a statistical inquiry. In Leo F. Schnore, ea., The New Urban History: Quantitative Explorations by Amer- ican Historians. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Kahrl, William L. 1982 Water and Power. Berkeley: University of California Press. Kirkland, Edward C. 1961 Industry Comes of Age: Business, Labor, and Public Policy 1860-1897. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Lane, Roger 1967 Policing the City: Boston 1822-1885. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Layton, Edward 1971 The Revolt of the Engineers: Social Responsibility and the American Engi- neering Profession. Cleveland, Ohio: Case Western Reserve University Press. Leavitt, Judith Walzer 1982 The Healthiest City: Milwaukee and the Politics of Health Reform. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Lively, Robert A. 1955 The American system: a review article. Business History Review 24(Summer):81- 95. Martin, Richard J. L., and Willeke, Gene E. 1978 The House That Jack Built: An Agenda for the Assessment of the Technologies of the Built Environment. Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Architecture. McShane, Clay 1974 Technology and Reform. Madison: The State Historical Society of Wisconsin. 1979 Transforming the use of urban space: a look at the revolution in street pave- ments, 1880-1924. Journal of Urban History 5(May):279-307. Merritt, Raymond H. 1969 Engineering in American Society. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky. Moehring, Eugene P. 1981 Public Works and the Patterns of Urban Real Estate Growth in Manhattan. 1835-1894. New York: Arno Press. 1982 Public Works and Urban History: Recent Trends and New Directions, Essays in Public History. No. 13. Chicago: Public Works Historical Society. Moore, Peter W. 1983 Public services and residential development in a Toronto neighborhood 1880- 1915. Journal of Urban History 9(Aug.):445-471. Muller, Peter O. 1981 Contemporary Suburban America. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. ..

OCR for page 4
58 PERSPECTIVES ON URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE Office of Technology Assessment 1981 Technology forLocalDevelopment. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GovernmentPrint- ing Office. Olson, Sherry H. 1980 Baltimore: The Building of an American City. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Uni- versity Press. Peterson, Jon A. 1976 The City Beautiful movement: forgotten origins and lost meaning. Journal of Urban History 2(Aug.):415-434. 1979 The impact of sanitary reform upon American urban planning, 1840-1890. Journal of Social History 13(Fall):83-104. Platt, Harold L. 1975 Urban Public Services, 1873-1914: A Reconsideration of Social and Structural Reform. Unpublished paper, Loyola University of Chicago. 1983 City Building in the New South: The Growth of Public Services in Houston, Texas, 1830-1915. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Pred, Allan R. 1966 The Spatial Dynamics of U.S. Urban-Industrial Growth, 1800-1914. Cam- bridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Rae, John B. 1971 The Road and the Car in American Life. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Rose, Mark H. 1979 Interstate: Express Highway Politics, 1941-1956. Lawrence, Kansas: Regents Press. Rose, Mark H., and Clark, John G. 1979 Light, heat, and power: energy choices in Kansas City, Wichita, and Denver, 1900-1935. Journal of Urban History 5(May):340-364. Rosenberg, Nathan 1972 Technology and American Economic Growth. White Plains, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe. Schiesl, Martin J. 1977 The Politics of Efficiency: Municipal Administration and Reform in America: 1880-1920. Berkeley: University of California Press. Schultz, Stanley K., and McShane, Clay 1978 To engineer the metropolis: sewers, sanitation and city planning in late-nine- teenth century America. Journal of American History 65(Sept.):389-411. Seely, Bruce E. 1982 Engineers and Government-Business Cooperation: Highway Standards and the Bureau of Public Roads, 1900-1940. Unpublished manuscript, Texas A&M University. Simon, Roger D. 1978 The City-Building Process: Housing and Services in New Milwaukee Neigh- borhoods 1880-1910. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. Stearns, Peter N., and Tarr, Joel A. 1982 Applied history: new/old frontier for the historical discipline. Institute News 3(0ct.). Stewman, Shelby, and Tarr, Joel A. 1982 Four decades of public-private partnerships in Pittsburgh. In R. Scott Foster and Renee A. Berger, eds., Public-Private Partnership in American Cities: Seven Case Studies. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books.

OCR for page 4
EVOLUTION OF THE URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE Studenski, Paul 59 1930 The Government of Metropolitan Areas in the United States. New York: Na- tional Municipal League. Studenski, Paul, and Krooss, Herman E. 1952 Financial History of the United States. New York: McGraw-Hill. Tarr, Joel A. 1971 The urban politician as entrepreneur. In Bruce Stave, ea., Urban Bosses, Machines, and Progressive Reformers. Boston. 1973 From city to suburb: the moral implications of transportation technology. In Alexander Callow, ea., American Urban History. Rev. ed. New York: Oxford. 1978 Transportation Innovation and Changing Spatial Patterns in Pittsburgh, 1850 1934. Essays in Public Works History, No.6. Chicago: Public Works Historical Society. 1979 The separate vs. combined sewer problem: a case study in urban technology design choice. Journal of Urban History 5(May):308-339. Tarr, Joel A., and McMichael, Francis C. 1977 The evolution of wastewater technology and the development of state regu- lation: a retrospective analysis. In Joel A. Tarr, ea., Retrospective Technology Assessment. San Francisco: San Francisco Press. Tarr, Joel A., McCurley, James, and Yosie, Terry F. 1980 The development and impact of urban wastewater technology: changing con- cepts of water quality control, 1850-1930. In Martin V. Melosi, ea., Pollution and Reform in American Cities. Austin: Texas University Press. Tarr, Joel A., et al. 1978 Retrospective Assessment of Wastewater Technology in the U.S., 1850-1972. Report to the National Science Foundation. Available from the National Tech- nical Information Service, Springfield, Va. Taylor, George Rogers 1966 The beginnings of mass transportation in urban America. The Smithsonian Journal of History (Summer, Autumn):35-50; 31-54. Teaford, Jon C. 1975 The Municipal Revolution in America: Origins of Modern Urban Government, 1650-1825. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1979 City and Suburb: The Political Fragmentation of Metropolitan America, 1850 1970. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 1982 Finis for Tweed and Steffens: rewriting the history of urban rule. Reviews in American History (December):137-139. Wade, Richard C. 1959 The Urban Frontier: The Rise of Western Cities, 1790-1830. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Ward, David 1971 Cities and Immigrants: A Geography of Change in Nineteenth Century Amer- ica. New York: Oxford. Warner, Sam Bass, Jr. 1962 Streetcar Suburbs: The Process of Growth in Boston, 1870-1900. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press and MIT Press. 1968 The Private City: Philadelphia in Three Periods of Its Growth. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

OCR for page 4
60 Weingold, Marilyn PERSPECTIVES ON URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE 1980 Pioneering in Parks and Parkways: Westchester County, New York, 1895-1945. Essays in Public Works History, No. 9. Chicago: Public Works Historical Society. Wiebe, Robert H. 1967 The Search for Order, 1877-1920. New York: Hill and Wang. DISCUSSION Randy Hamilton A historical view of urban public facilities should focus on tools, skills, materials, and sources of power. These themes allow cohesion ~ in ana .ysls. In discussing the financing of infrastructure, we should perhaps say that cities invested rather than spent; the returns on this in- vestment have been great. Compared with private investments, defaults have been rare. This is a remarkably good performance. In analyzing the financing of urban facilities, it would also be help- ful to place some of the numbers in perspective, comparing them with total city budgets. Having looked at the walking city, the transit city, and the au- tomobile city, we now need to speculate on the next kind of city, perhaps the "wired" city, and the changes in infrastructure it will require. Finally, we should give some attention to how we train public works professionals. Wilfred Owen Tarr's analysis suggests ways in which history repeats itself. It also identifies some things we should not allow history to repeat. The major issue raised by tracing urban evolution is the kind of o.it.v t.h~t. oomph next the snace-a~e city the city concerned with ~ i, ~ _ . ~ ~ ~ ,, both inner and outer space. We have moved in a short time from cesspools and cisterns to microcomputers, lasers, and fiber optics as important elements of urban infrastructure. These new technologies will make vast dif- ferences in the character and functions of urban America and pro- duce, in turn, revolutionary changes in supporting infrastructure.

OCR for page 4
EVOLUTION OF THE URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE Two principal conclusions can be drawn: 61 1. We should be alert to history to anticipate but not simply to accept changes, to understand and influence them in the na- tional interest. 2. Just as history can be a guide, so can geography. We frequently ignore both. One impressive fact in our public works history is how much we learned from Europe in the early days. Its experts were welcomed to our cities. Any current research program should emphasize tech- nology transfer, combining our awareness of history with more care- fu} analysis of infrastructure solutions in other parts of the world. There is too little comparative analysis. This is important in several respects, particularly in the (levelopment of large cities and in the organization of the suburbs. Large urban areas are the culmination of complex approaches to urban development. Some countries are beginning to use large transportation systems to organize such large- scale development. Japan, for instance, connects major urban con- centrations by high-speed rail lines. Singapore has redeveloped it- self and a series of major satellites and in the process has achieved a high standard of living. We need a much better understancling of how these places have developed and the role of their public works systems in how they took shape and how they function as cities. Tarr's paper reminds us that our legacy of public works stays with us. The depression-era facilities and those of more recent years remain a most important part of today's infrastructure. They pro- vide some important lessons for us, such as the need to include in the design the people for whom they are built. Concerning the pitfalls and possibilities of borrowing, some of the most exciting projects in the world are being financed by de- velopment banks, such as the World Bank and the Inter American Development Bank. These banks guarantee loans made by private bankers. We should have an internal U.S. development bank to undertake needed projects at home. Another lesson from history concerns pricing. Our rates for using facilities have often been too low, whether for transit, commuter railroads, or water systems. We have consistently underpriced the highway system. It is now clear that we must not only pay to build these systems, but we must also have an assured means of sup

OCR for page 4
62 PERSPECTIVES ON URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE porting their operation. Some financial trade-offs are necessary and are being made. Of the 21 cents a mile it costs to drive a compact car, for instance, only 1 cent supports the highway system. We need to ask how we can make more energy-efficient vehicles and use the savings in design and operating costs to pay for the facilities they must use. Both pricing and regulations can reduce costs and de- mand. The restriction of the extension of Route I-66, in the Virginia suburbs of Washington, to high-occupancy vehicles during rush hours is an illustration of the use of regulation to influence demand. History and geography suggest a strategy for future research and action that combines technology, large systems, jobs, and new meth- ods of finance to determine the need for a national city-building effort. City-building corporations using modern technology and en- gineering might be created for both new development and rede- velopment involving a joint public and private effort. This approach would be better for the country, producing more efficient and sat- isfying cities instead of stagnation and decay. This of course depends on careful analysis of situations and what might be done better. Abe! Wolman Tarr provides us with a comprehensive clinical diagnosis of the evolution of public works service to U.S. society. The record is a rehearsal of ad hoc responsiveness to the demands of people, often incoherent, for protection against fire, dirt, disease, and immobility. His detailed account of these efforts makes clear that the evo- Jution of infrastructure to provide service is "more complex than simple economic models suggest." The progress was cyclical in na- ture, reflecting economic depressions and recovery, the rise and fall of"bossism," temporary reformism, and political ideology. Physical obstacles to trade demanded correctives, which are described by Tarr in colorful designations of the transition from the walking city, to the streetcar city, to the automobile city, and, ~ might add without plagiarizing, to the subway city. For two centuries, contests and changes were marked by the forces of public and private groups and governmental and voluntary pressures. If there is a common thread of deliberate reasoning and plan throughout these years of true progress and failures, it is that the movement was essentially forward. The search for the moti- vating grand plan was and still is elusive. What are the implications for the present and the future of this

OCR for page 4
EVOLUTIONOFTHEURBANINFRASTRUCTURE 63 past record of human endeavor? Tarr suggests five or six areas for future research. All of them are significant markers to aid the future worker in this field of high social impact. But they are too limited. ~ venture to suggest some additional therapies, largely reflective of a lifetime of participation in and observation of the functions here discussed. ~ am startled by the fact that my own span of life covers almost half the period Tarr has so vividly traversed. My view is colored by activities as a public official at all three levels of government, as an educator, and as a consultant. Some preliminary observations provide a setting. Accomplish- ments by reformers have been episodic and of short duration. One of their lauded gifts was in civil service protection, a device ~ have found less than helpful. Too often, it too has succumbed to corruption and has resulted in constraint of personnel change and in protection of mediocrity. As to "bossism," one of our most progressive and efficient mayors once nostalgically remarked that the old-time boss provided more effective municipal service than modern checks and balances have produced! The suggestion has much relevance to our view of present policy making. We live now in a stressful and exciting arena, reminiscent of a few earlier situations. The compound of an economic recession, cou- pled with a new set of ideologies regarding government interven- tion, drives us toward new orientations in public works develop- ment. While we rush toward correctives of the so-called welfare state objectives of the 1930s Roosevelt programs, we are engaged in again battling over work programs characteristic of those same bygone days. The New Federalism is a revival of the proposals of Franklin Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower. Simultaneously, environmental groups press toward negativism. Public participation engenders multiple pressure groups at all levels of governmental decision making. On this stage, old and new solutions press for prompt study, evaluation, and implementation, and ~ add a few here. What are the potentialities for survival of the weakened cities? Will they continue to lose people and viability? May cities be joint beneficiaries of wider-area taxes and cor- responding services? 3. Increasing private corporate responsibility for many public works is illustrated in water supply, sewerage, solid wastes,

OCR for page 4
64 PERSPECTIVES ON URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE bridges, and even schools. What protective measures are in- dicated for the revival of these old contests? 4. New institutional structures, transcending political bounda- ries, would be helpful. Political scientists have advocated these for more than half a century. Can their delayed use be expe- dited? 5. Are municipalities really bankrupt? Or do we mean their rev ernments are, as distinct from their constituents? 6. Municinal it him" ~ 1 nr~ ~ ^ ~~r 1 1 J - Do, ~rC4ll~l=;~ love ~ 1ung- and successful history of local au- tonomy and responsibility. These have been seriously eroded by federal largesse and consequent transfer of decision making to federal agencies. How best may responsibility be recaptured in a disappearing long-time flood of federal and state money? 7. Financing local public works has likewise a long record of success. In a period of economic disability, orthodox formulas appear less available. What innovations in local fiscal policy are discernible or developable? Fortunately, serious ap- proaches to new potentials of financing are being explored. S. Delayed maintenance and operation have resulted in the wide- spread deterioration of systems. The reasons for the imminent collapse are not hard to find. More glamorous objectives have held the stage over the past decades, and it has been easy to cut budgets in less conspicuous, but life-supporting, necessi- ties. Must one wait to avoid r~t~c!tr~r~h~ {~ I-:ll: a_ _r l is from nonexistent sources? Some public works directors have already moved forward in determining priorities, planning correctives, and engaging in the "doable." What feasible im- plementations are discernible, while waiting for a new mil- lennium of federal largesse? 9. The advent of public participation is not new. Its extent and militancy today are greater. What devices may be developed to provide an early shift from adversarial to mediated reso- Jution of highly important public issues? No formula is readily at hand. Underlying all I: have said is an issue of far broader implications than for infrastructure alone. The participation of the public has undoubtedly always been essential. In recent years its eDaboration has been stimulated in no small degree by officialdom. The flow- ering of pressure groups, including many of our own professions, has resulted in some input of value. On the debit side, the phenom

OCR for page 4
EVOLUTION OF THE URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE 65 enon has eroded the democratic process, wherein decision making was once assigned to elected officials. Aided and abetted by public polls, not distinguished by clear neutrality, the elected official keeps an eye on the polls and on television. Pressure groups provide an important source of information and ideas. They are often in conflict and only infrequently do their desires result in sound public interest decisions. More important, they are not responsible for the socio- economic results of their implemented demands. This broader ques- tion of public policy making deserves a place on our agenda for research. ~ do not pretend that these opportunities for research exhaust the list. They are illustrative of present challenges in public works development. Inherent in them is an assumption that the day of new works and rehabilitation of the old is not over. People multiply, and their demands are rarely reduced. Tens of millions wait for water supply, sewerage, solid wastes handling, transport, safety, and health. The desires are not new. While we search for innovation, the record is clear that the past discloses many markers for the future. For this disclosure, ~ am forever indebted to the diligence of Joe! Tarr. SUMMARY In theory perhaps some cities shouic3 be allowed to die, but there is a human factor involved. The important question is: What options are available for a city? We know from history that it is hard to establish a rigid framework for such analysis. Politics, value changes, and the rise of professionalism have all altered the course of events. We know that cities will become more communications-intensive, but people will still expect water from the tap. We will still need streets and sewers. Thus, while some demands on facilities will change and there may be new types of facilities, some traditional parts of the infrastructure will remain important. The distinctions between the use of public works for immediate job creation and long-term investments were much clearer during the New Deal period than they are today. Our dilemma is that our cities are in a state of flux. It is not clear what will happen to older cities. Incidentally, some of those thought to be dying in the 1930s are back on the table for observation today. Their original reasons for existence have disappeared; the question is whether they can find a new reason. In this sense it is hard to approach spending for

OCR for page 4
66 PERSPECTIVES ON URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE public works by arguing that all that is needed is to take old plans off the shelf and start building. Those plans often do not lend them- seIves to current needs. We really have not wrestled with the decision-making process. We need to look hard at bosses versus professionals versus public participation in public works decisions. This issue should be ex- amined in terms of how we should set priorities and who should be involved. We need to look at the contradictory benefits of each system. The federal decision to put the interstate system through cities instead of stopping at the beltways, for instance, was a critical one that preempted other local choices. Federal mandates may cause more problems than they are worth. One federal official argued that local politicians will not focus on the size and scope of infrastructure problems because of their re- sponsiveness to political pressure. He suggested that government could not be trusted to solve the problem and that the problem of conflicting pressures could be resolved only if the private sector takes more responsibility. This view was strongly contested; an- other participant argued that the private sector would simply make decisions that were in its own interest. The point was also made that the political system was indeed responsive to its constituents, in contrast with dealing with an abstract, normative mode] of what "should" be done.