A Real Debate On Growth In Arizona
Buckeye's recent vote to allow the largest subdivision in Arizona's history does nothing to settle questions about sprawl.
"The questions revolve not around 'growth' vs. 'no growth' but the complicated art of where to set the balance... The threat of hundreds of thousands of new houses should require the mother of all environmental-impact studies. Developers and residents should be taxed, with the money going to transit and center city projects. A Sonoran Desert Commission could regulate sprawl; that's how California kept its coast beautiful."
Thanks to transport-policy listserv
Published on Sunday, May 25, 2003 in
- Infographic: Space Allocation by Population in 15 U.S. Cities
- Denver Freeway Expansion Makes a Bad Situation Worse
- A Tipping Point in the Geography of the Creative Class?
- What Made It Possible for Oregon to End Single-Family Zoning?
- Master-Planned Cities in the Spotlight
- Op-Ed: Lakewood's Growth Cap Is 'Climate Arson'
- SUVs Kill Pedestrians—and They Have for a Long Time
- Research: Transit Times Determine Social Networks
- Report: Lack of Apartments Contributes to the Housing Affordability Crisis
- No Quick Fixes for L.A.’s Transit Ridership Woes
- Uncertain Future of Portland’s Neighborhood Associations Causing Controversy
- As Extreme Weather Becomes More Common, Dams Become More Vulnerable
- The Argument Against Home Ownership
- French 'EcoTax' Targets Air Travel to Benefit Rail Network
- Sidewalk Labs' Quayside Plans Get First Public Hearing in Toronto
- Wave of New Apartment Building in Sydney Means Relief for Renters
- Does the Plan to Revitalize a D.C. Canal Too Much Resemble the High Line?
- Parking Minimums Not Required in a Larger Section of Houston
- 'Vision Zero 2.0' Launched When Vision Zero 1.0 Didn't Save Any Lives
- Low-Income Housing Tax Credits Lose Luster in the Post-GOP Tax Reform World
