Houston Needs Flexibility, Not Rules
Houston leaders need to be cautious that their 'plans' for the city don't stifle its greatest asset -- its economic opportunity and quality of life -- by introducing prescriptive land use zoning.
"Houstonians have wisely rejected zoning several times over the last century. In the process, it has established itself as one the most vibrant and dynamic cities of the 21st century. Research has shown that development patterns in Houston are not dissimilar to those in other more regulated cities like Dallas and Atlanta, but the lack of strong regulatory barriers to new development has kept housing costs low and allowed the real estate market to keep apace with the demands of a growing and diverse population."
"...Planning should facilitate urban dynamism, not stifle it through stringent rules and the micromanagement of land use.
However, if the end result is the imposition of a decision-making and regulatory bureaucracy on top of something that currently works well, it could create imbalances and inefficiencies that would try to force the wrong things in the wrong places at the wrong time. Current planning tools tend to be too inflexible, static and resistant to economic changes. Houston needs flexibility and adaptability to allow dynamic growth and urban evolution."
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
- Houston Densifies and Diversifies Housing - Jan 04, 2012
- LA Artist Reopens Derelict JC Penney As Art Complex - Dec 13, 2011
- Wealthy Developer Finds Money to Fund Freeway Project, Despite Opposition - Nov 11, 2011
- Planting Parks to Remedy Blight - Nov 03, 2011
- Austin Releases An All Encompassing New 30 Year Plan - Sep 29, 2011
Planetizen picks
Contribute
- Chinese Cities in Desperate Need of Competent Planning
- The Rise of Peer-to-Peer Car Sharing
- What the Feds are Doing to Connect Housing Policy to Health Policy
- Why the Politics of Climate Change Matter
- Waste Disposal Becomes Sexy
- Murky Future for Two of D.C.'s Architectural Gems
- The Story Behind One of the Most Controversial Buildings in the Country
- The Benefits of Creating Hybrid Zoning Codes
- The Appeal of In-Town Big Box
- The Growing Appeal of Drinking From the Toilet
My Storm, Managing the Recovery of New Orleans in the Wake of Katrina is required reading for planners
U Penn Press
Feb 13, 2012
Volunteerism Plays Critical Role in Reaching World’s Millennium Development Goals
Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs, Cleveland State University
Feb 10, 2012
www.flickr.com
|
Dishonest Arguments
There are several faults in this article. Now, I am an urban planning Master's student who feels strongly that Jane Jacobs has some excellent points and can appreciate more "free market" development within a city. However, I have to say that holding Houston up as a pinnacle of this "free market" is more damaging to that argument than helpful. What is more, the authors are disingenuous in their use of statistics. Comparing housing prices in Houston to those in Portland is particularly silly. First of all, the entirety of Texas has dramatically lower housing costs than most of the nation regardless of how much planning is applied in their various cities; so planning is not a related variable. Secondly, Portland's housing costs are more a factor of high-demand than planning constrictions. The whole west coast has much higher housing prices due to this demand, and much of it is related to the exodus of Californians into Portland (and Seattle, and places like Medford/Ashland, Oregon - have you looked at THEIR prices?). As a member of a libertarian organization like the Reason Foundation, which prides itself on "free" capitalist economics, Gilroy should be fully aware of the laws of supply and demand. Housing prices are more a factor of demand than anything else. Houston has some of the highest poverty and crime rates in the country, where Portland has some of the lowest of any major city. If the authors want to argue for planning which facilitates choice and diversity in the urban matrix - by all means do so - but they need to be honest. These numbers are not honest.
- Brandon
Argumentation by the L word.
Brandon,
It is important that you recognized that Leonard Gilroy wrote this article. Reason mag is indeed the L word and Leonard is aware of supply and demand.
His assignment was to write about how fab the (nonexistent) free market is He just doesn't mention those factors in his argumentation, which fails in the very first paragraph with the false premise that planners don't realize that the best laid plans of mice and men go awry. Once one reads that, one doesn't need to go on, as the argument proceeds from that false premise. What happens after market failures? And what about non-market goods like community? Right, Len?
Best,
D