Quote:
Originally Posted by animatedmartian
Getting Detroit to grow is actually the easy part as the city comes pretty close to positive annual population growth during peak economic cycles (eg; from 1995 to 1996, the city only lost 2,000 residents), but to fill up a good amount of the underused space with urban development is an entirely different task.
I feel like anti-sprawl policies would only serve to boost real estate prices but not actually promote growth in the core. It might force the more desirable suburbs to upzone with density drawing away the need to develop the inner-city.
|
That doesn't seem to happen in other regions with space constraints, such as NY Metro and the Bay Area. But it would force sprawl to reflect its true cost upfront, which would make investment in the central city much more competitive.