Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : John Pitera's Market Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (4009)	6/5/2001 4:47:11 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 33421

"Smart Growth" Policies Hi Hawkmoon, I'm curious for some amplification on this statement: "Btw... there could be a number of reasons for higher real-estate prices, but one of the most sinister is this "smart-growth" policy that many communities are requiring. This limits new development within established infrastructure, forcing old buildings to be torn down to be replaced with new ones." I for one am a big fan of re-development. I don't see it as sinister in the least. I see it as far more ecologically sensible than the endless greenfield exploitation and abandonment cycle that was the norm in the US for so long. What is it that is sinister about preserving the natural environment, cleaning up after ourselves and controlling the metastasis of human created, human adverse asphalt jungles? I only have to note the great success of many urban projects such as the Rockefeller Center, the Embarcadero in San Francisco, or the Napolean III-created boulevards of Paris to suggest that the elimination of delapidated infrastructure and replacement with well designed development is perhaps the wisest urban planning that we engage in. It seems to me that the only crowd that opposes re-development is the sort of rape & pillage developer and the lucky farmer/landholder in the path of development who has such a bottom-line mindset that the exploitation of the natural environment is simply not part of the calculus of cost. This is hopelessly archaic, selfish, exploitative and short-sighted thinking, IMHO. Best, Ray :)