« Overspending Crisis | Main | Flickr to Schmap! »
Locating Construction Efforts - a Clarification
January 31, 2008
I feel a clarification is order regarding my previous post. My position on where housing and other building construction efforts should be located was not clearly set out.
I believe that suburban building is inevitable. In fact, in areas of growing population, unless a community has a strong planning effort to focus new growth inward and upward, no alternative exists. But in areas that are already losing population (Rust Belt states/cities), people should seriously think about refocusing growth toward existing infrastructure. This doesn’t mean that people need to move back into 1940s and 1950s era spec homes built for GM workers (Flint, Detroit, etc.). Rather, people (and developers) should be allowed to possibly tear down old homes, combine small building lots, and construct new homes (recycling materials all along, of course).
Here in Oklahoma City, the existing neighborhood fabric is relatively intact. We haven’t had a housing collapse, and we don’t have neighborhoods with large portions of empty homes. Further, our population is rising. Therefore, the new housing for the growing population must go somewhere. Some of it is being focused inward, near downtown, revitalizing one of the most housing-devoid areas of town. But the development is also on the outer-edge of the City limits. It’s just a fact.
To restate - new housing is not necessarily a bad thing, especially in growing areas. In shrinking areas, it shouldn’t be seen as a bad thing either, especially if it’s focused inward. Overall, we should be looking at our patterns of development and our footprint on the world.
Posted by paul at January 31, 2008 08:54 AM
Comments