Publications

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Cooper-McCann, Patrick. 2016. “The Trap of Triage: Lessons from the ‘Team Four Plan.’” Journal of Planning History. 15(2): 149-169. doi: 10.1177/1538513215602026.

This paper addresses the politics of spatial targeting: how city leaders should decide where to direct scarce funding for community development. In 1975, consultants from the planning and urban design firm Team Four Inc. advised St. Louis planners to pursue a strategy of neighborhood triage: ‘‘conservation’’ for areas in good health, ‘‘redevelopment’’ for areas just starting to decline, and ‘‘depletion’’ for areas already in severe distress. The firm’s recommended strategy reflected the latest thinking among urban planners, but it provoked outrage among residents of the city’s predominantly black North Side, who read ‘‘depletion’’ as a promise of benign neglect. In my article, I explain how Team Four justified its advice, and why, four decades later, the controversy over its memo persists. I argue that racial equity must be a factor in targeting community development funds, and that planners must develop alternative strategies to revitalize neighborhoods that are not targeted for redevelopment.

BOOK CHAPTERS

Dewar, Margaret, Matthew Weber, Eric Seymour, Meagan Elliott, and Patrick Cooper-McCann. 2015. “Learning from Detroit: How Research on a Declining City Enriches Urban Studies.” In Reinventing Detroit: The Politics of Possibility, edited by Michael Peter Smith and L. Owen Kirkpatrick, 37-56. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. (PDF)

Today, Detroit stands alone among large American cities in both the depth and breadth of its distress. Thousands of homes and many acres of land are vacant and abandoned. Residents are disproportionately poor and racially segregated. The tax base is decimated. What can scholars and practitioners learn about urban processes and planning from research on such an outlier city? We argue, based on examination of literature, that research on Detroit can advance understanding of cities and urban planning because of its extreme conditions. Researchers, for example, are able to observe phenomena in Detroit that likely exist elsewhere but go unnoticed. The magnifying effects of the city’s decline make the invisible visible. Detroit also allows researchers to untangle certain phenomena, such as gentrification, from the context of growth where they are usually observed, casting those phenomena in a new light. The large swaths of vacant urban land in Detroit are also an asset to researchers. They allow testing of hypotheses that would be difficult to assess in more intact, densely populated areas. Such research can have broad application to heavily developed urban areas elsewhere. Furthermore, Detroit research can expose the shortcomings of policies that presume strong real estate markets but do not work as expected in disinvested neighborhoods where property demand is very weak. Detroit’s extreme conditions also pose a challenge for some of the disciplines that contribute to urban planning. These disciplines have tended to focus on how and why cities and regions grow, who benefits when they do, and how to renew growth when it ebbs. Not enough attention has been paid to understanding decline. Scholars have figuratively modeled urban phenomena only across the range that variables exhibit during growth, leaving out the range during decline. The challenge that Detroit poses for urban studies is to flesh out that model – to understand the spatial, social, political and economic dynamics of change and how decline may differ from growth.