Troy Thiel wrote: "[What we have to do here is ensure that in our center city potential...perhaps through the downtown Plan or Economic Development plans....that the critical piece of job growth is a large component of what helps infill occur rationally....]"
A good point about "job centers." People don't enjoy commuting if they can help it. But what if a middle management person buys in a suburb near one employer and then becomes employed by another employer in another "job center" in an entirely different quadrant in Chicago? Should they uproot their family and children or drive the circumferetial Tri-State? If they decide to move, they want a readily marketable house. And that is likely to be a tract house in a development of like houses. Those houses best retain their value. They are not likely to be living in some "white elephant" eligible for a makeover on "This Old House." Chances are,---all this person's stored equity is in his house. "Investment" or not, this represents the biggest asset to most families. Suburban houses among like houses retain their group value best. Yes, all the "forces" in a community work for their OWN ends. Each community around Chicago vies for the employers. And every little town in Wisconsin has set up a "industrial park" and a BID area. Ultimately, though, the decision as to where the likes of Abbot Labs locates----is with Abbot Labs. The planners and politicians can scramble to offer incentives. And these can be important. In Wisconsin we have seen paper companies leave and now our last beer company is probably leaving. So, you decide which is the chicken or the egg, the horse or the cart. The trouble comes when the planners and politicians lean on the little people through restrictions and zonings, particularly when they are already located and fixed. The Abbot Labs and the paper companies can much more easily embrace a plan from the top. Returning to the question of exercise amenities in living areas, I would expect that if these are added without restricting "mobility, security, or education availability", they would increase real estate values. Throughout history, urban parklands have been created more to increase land values that to encourage good health. Higher land values have always existed around urban parks in concentric circles. All the books on green spaces describe this fact. Bike trails, running paths, dog parks, enclosed lakes, all ad to the values in suburbs. Strangely, both market forces and government planning forces are largely UNCONTROLLABLE. As an example look at Washington, D.C. That city is probably the most economically SEGREGATED city in the USA. The crime ridden poor live in Anacostia, while the opposites live in the NW quadrant extending out from Georgetown through Gaitherburg. DC and close in Northerly suburbs are mixed, but even there neighborhoods are segregated by house unit size and prices. In DC, your address describes your social status. Every city has shades of the "DC situation." The local politicians want to avoid crime and criminals, while attracting white collar incomes and real estate tax bases. Certainly middle and upper middle classes don't want their children going to schools needing daily armed police. Now, these are the questions and problems for planners? Where should our prison populations go when they are released? I doubt they are welcome in Middleton? Eric Westhagen _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
