Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, June 15, 1993 TAG: 9308240778
SECTION: EXTRA PAGE: 1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: JOE KENNEDY STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
It purports to rank 828 cities, counties and metropolitan areas in the United States using 70 population-related social, economic and environmental indicators that affect the lives of everyone, but children most of all.
It says the three best metro areas for kids are Burlington, Vt.; Fargo, N.D., and Moorehead, Minn.; and Madison, Wis.
The worst metro areas are Houston, Texas; Los Angeles-Long Beach in California; and Miami-Hiahleah, Fla.
The best city is Overland Park, Kan.. the worst is Newark, N.J. Chittendon County, Vt., is judged the premier county, and Dade County, Fla., the worst.
Roanoke County, Roanoke City and the Roanoke metro area all perform admirably in the study. Roanoke County ranks ninth best out of 493 counties. Roanoke City ranks 36th out of 195 cities. And the metro area is 24th out of 239.
Not surprisingly, the study links size with problems - bigger is usually worse, not better, according to its criteria, which fall into 10 major categories: population change and crowding; family economics; community economics; maternal and child care; education; crime; air quality; water resources; toxic releases and sewage; and energy and transportation.
This plays directly into the special-interest group's main concern, which is the effect of large number of people on human and natural resources.
``This is not a perfect study,'' said Dianne Sherman, ZPG's communications director, in a telephone interview. She supervised the work on it.
``This is a snapshot, the best we could do, the best data the federal government provides.''
You don't have to be a genius to discern that unrestricted growth can be damaging to people and places alike. And you don't have to live in Calcutta to feel that damage, or to believe that, in many places in this country, the damage increased during the go-go - or grow-grow - '80s.
The May 1993 edition of the ZPG Reporter, the group's newsletter, said U.S. population, at 257 million, is growing faster than any industrialized nation's. It might increase by 50 percent over the next 60 years, it said.
``Communities from coast to coast are increasingly beleaguered by population-related problems from pollution to overcrowding to crime,'' the publication states. It goes on to note that, in many areas, landfills are reaching their limits. In some, fresh water supplies are perilously low.
The average population of the study's 25 worst-rated metropolitan areas exceeds 1.8 million; that's more than six times the average of the 25 best-rated areas. Factors in the poorer scores include large population gains and overcrowded living conditions; high unemployment rates, poverty and crime; overburdened educational and public health facilities; and alarming environmental problems.
Most of the best metro areas for children, the study says, are in the Midwest and New England - areas that have seen little population growth over the past decade or more. The Sunbelt - the South and West - contributes 22 of the 25 worst metro areas, mostly in California, Texas and Florida.
There were some exceptions to the bigger-is-worse, smaller-is-better rule. The San Francisco Bay area, with a population of 1.6 million, ranked 25th among metro areas, or one notch below Roanoke. Galveston-Texas City in Texas and Ocala, Fla., were among the worst, despite their relatively low populations, in the 200,000 range.
The study comes at a convenient time for Roanoke Valley residents, who have worried about job losses in the New River area as well as at Gardner-Denver, a mining equipment company, and Dominion Bank in Roanoke, among other businesses. Even now, a series of newspaper articles is examining the valley's economic future, with growth in some form or fashion viewed as an obvious plus.
Sherman of ZPG said all growth isn't bad. Unplanned growth, or unbridled growth, can be disastrous.
``It's like planning your own family - you have to decide how much growth you can accommodate. The lesson from this study ... is that being a growth maniac really puts the future of our children and our communities at risk.''
California, Texas and Florida fared worst in the study ``because they concentrated so much on growth they forgot to think about maintaining their quality of life, their environmental quality.''
The irony, she said, is that many of the companies that provided the growth are deserting those areas because of the problems the growth created, ``leaving behind residents with poor air quality and overcrowded schools and, basically, overstressed infrastructures.''
Public officials, business leaders and residents focused on the short-term gain but overlooked the long-term pain, she said. but that's changing. Children's advocacy groups and even some mayors of big but troubled areas have said the study doesn't surprise them. They only hope the damage isn't irreversible, she said.
Not all of the areas which ranked poorly were pleased to have the publicity. In Houston, ZPG was labeled ``a liberal advocacy group,'' Sherman said. It's already held in low repute by some conservative religious groups for its support of unrestricted abortion rights as well as other means of birth control. (For the record, the organization considers itself environmental in nature).
Sherman said the effects of unrestrained growth are becoming so obvious that she was able to spend a congenial hour talking about the study on a Christian radio program in Dallas.
``I think people are beginning to want to reach a consensus,'' she said.
By the way, Charlotte, N.C., Roanoke's fast-growing neighbor to the south and the object of both envy and scorn among valley residents, ranked 74th among 195 cities. Mecklenburg County came out 398th among 493 counties. And the metro area, encompassing Charlotte, Gastonia and a small portion of South Carolina, finished 173rd out of 239.
Roanoke did better all the way around.
by CNB