"In the meantime, during these low, ragged years, a few lessons about urban planning can be picked from the stucco pile.
One is that, at least here in California, the outlying cities themselves encouraged the boom, spurred by the state's broken tax system. Hemmed in by property tax limitations, cities were compelled to increase revenue by the easiest route: expanding urban boundaries. They let developers plow up walnut groves and vineyards and places that were supposed to be strawberry fields forever to pay for services demanded by new school parents and park users.
Second, look at the cities with stable and recovering home markets. On this coast, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle and San Diego come to mind. All of these cities have fairly strict development codes, trying to hem in their excess sprawl. Developers, many of them, hate these restrictions. They said the coastal cities would eventually price the middle class out, and start to empty.
It hasn't happened. Just the opposite. The developers' favorite role models, the laissez faire free-for-alls - Las Vegas, the Phoenix metro area, South Florida, this valley - are the most troubled, the suburban slums.
Come see: this is what happens when money and market, alone, guide the way we live."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not just Massachusetts that would benefit from responsible town planning; all states and their towns would do well to cut back on new developments. But the chapter 40B law makes it impossible for towns to stop unwanted 40B projects. Developers would like to have us believe bigger and increased amounts of buildings are needed for healthy towns, but as Mr. Egan says, it's just the opposite. No one wants to live near so many empty buildings, so why not renovate and revitalize existing structures in order to meet housing needs?
No comments:
Post a Comment