3 ms·

The unstated assumption is that we aren't going to build new towns. Vail is a post WWII development. It used to be nothing. Colorado still has A LOT of undevel

The unstated assumption is that we aren't going to build new towns. Vail is a post WWII development. It used to be nothing. Colorado still has A LOT of undeveloped land. Water is an issue, but residential use is pretty small, and it doesn't matter if my residence is in Vail or a new town, I still am going to need water. The problem is that opportunity is, for some reason, being geographically limited to fewer and fewer places.

gottorf 3y ago
> Colorado still has A LOT of undeveloped land. Not just Colorado! I live in a state that's pretty much middle of the pack for size and density, and there's no shortage of open land around here. No water concerns, either, with plenty of rainfall. > opportunity is, for some reason, being geographically limited to fewer and fewer places. I think the economic history of the past few decades (at least) has been one of trading away resilience for higher efficiency; bigger and more geographically centralized economic engines that are more efficient, but are more vulnerable to shocks, as the recent supply-chain issues have shown. Covid and its aftereffects may reverse that trend.
- Pet_Ant 3y ago
  Just because there is open land, doesn't mean we should pave it over. I really feel like we should cap the percentage of the earth's surface that is developed to something like 2010 levels and just infill. Otherwise the Amazon doesn't stand a chance or biodiversity.
allturtles 3y ago
Vail boomed because of the ski resort. People won't be nearly as attracted to a mountain town that's far from existing ski resort, and starting a new, viable ski resort is hard. Another constraining factor on development in Colorado is road access. Almost all traffic between the mountains and the highly populated Denver metro area (including the only major airport in the region) is along the I-70 corridor. Absent the construction of a new major tunnel across the continental divide, if you are far from that corridor, your site will be much less attractive.

gottorf 3y ago

> Colorado still has A LOT of undeveloped land. Not just Colorado! I live in a state that's pretty much middle of the pack for size and density, and there's no shortage of open land around here. No water concerns, either, with plenty of rainfall. > opportunity is, for some reason, being geographically limited to fewer and fewer places. I think the economic history of the past few decades (at least) has been one of trading away resilience for higher efficiency; bigger and more geographically centralized economic engines that are more efficient, but are more vulnerable to shocks, as the recent supply-chain issues have shown. Covid and its aftereffects may reverse that trend.

Pet_Ant 3y ago
Just because there is open land, doesn't mean we should pave it over. I really feel like we should cap the percentage of the earth's surface that is developed to something like 2010 levels and just infill. Otherwise the Amazon doesn't stand a chance or biodiversity.

allturtles 3y ago

Vail boomed because of the ski resort. People won't be nearly as attracted to a mountain town that's far from existing ski resort, and starting a new, viable ski resort is hard. Another constraining factor on development in Colorado is road access. Almost all traffic between the mountains and the highly populated Denver metro area (including the only major airport in the region) is along the I-70 corridor. Absent the construction of a new major tunnel across the continental divide, if you are far from that corridor, your site will be much less attractive.