3 ms·
I guess one example would be the ideological push for dense urbanization. It makes sense from the perspective of a city jammed between mountains or packed on an
by tomatotomato37 8y ago
I guess one example would be the ideological push for dense urbanization. It makes sense from the perspective of a city jammed between mountains or packed on an island, but not so much for a prairie city that could survive quite well with low density development if it’s competent enough at managing its sprawl.
- ummonk 8y agoOdd. I've definitely noticed this ideological push, but it has always felt somewhat external to me; it feels like it is mostly pushed by transplants, especially temporary transplants to SF, who think everyone should live in dense walkable cities. FWIW I do think SF and the peninsula need dense urbanization, but this is due to the geography of the bay and the fact that demand seems to be overwhelmingly outstripping supply, and I'd rather increase density than rip up the green space along the peninsula. I don't think this is necessary for most cities though, or even necessary around San Jose for that matter (since it has less narrow growth constraints due to geography). I get the impression the majority of locals / immigrants in the Bay Area who support denser urbanization have a similar viewpoint, and don't consider it an ideological necessity for the rest of the world.