"The purpose of the Infill Builders Association is promote the business of developing great neighborhoods in California cities and towns. We are focusing efforts to catalyze investments in city centers in urban areas as well as to promote the policies that support sustainable development."
"Sprawl in the sense of taking farmland and building ranch homes on it that are far away from anything – that business model is dead. People don't want to live in those houses anymore. The new homebuyers are looking for places where their kids can walk to o school where they can get to work with a short drive or a ride on the train."
"The co-benefits of doing good infill development go far beyond just the sticks and bricks of the housing itself. The fact that we can preserve California's open space by building on already-utilized land, the fact that we can support existing communities in providing more revenue to promote their growth, infrastructure, schools, all of it. It makes sense for California."
Thanks to Josh Stephens
Comments
Infill Developers
Unfortunately, "infill" will likely become another green-wash term covering up the true impact questionable and harmful developments.
Claiming that infill creates better communities in and of itself because it provides denser and cheaper housing, is the equivalent of McDonalds claiming that it creates better nutrition because it provides denser and cheap calories.
Unless mass-transit infrastructure PRECEDES infill, infill will end up being even worse than sprawl since it will fail utterly and create a new generation of urban dead-zones as population flees what would be the worst of both worlds: lack of space and car dependence.
Building a mid-rise infill housing block at five times the historic density of a neighborhood while also putting in eight times the historic density of parking spaces in an out-of-sight-out-of-mind underground garage for that development is no way to better any community.
If you build it...
If you build it (density and infill), they (mass transit systems) will come.
Infill
Yes. Because building infrastructure after the fact is sooooo much easier.
There is ZERO guarantee that mass-transit will get built after infill.
Infill could end up being just another Trojan Horse to make a city unlivable.
Mass-transit first.
Infill second.
The other way around is just plain dumb.