Quote:
Originally Posted by Qubert
Tehcnically, the real estate industry would be just fine with a more urban future. It's really the oil-car industry that has beef.
Suburbanism in the US, to me, is almost more a cultural and social phenominom that something that can objectivley be seen as a brick and mortar issue. Many posters have made very rational and logistical arguments regarding why urban areas thrive over suburban and yet the exasperation continues.
American suburbia, IMHO, is simply people acting on their inner desires a) To be "King of One's Castle and b) To have a builtform that specifically isolates oneself from others in society, which is attractive to those with intolerance issues.
|
while the oil industry does wield political power, its power is generally at higher levels of government. your various mayors and aldermen usually aren't receiving campaign contributions from oilmen.
zoning is the general preserve of the municipal entities. research your local municipal politicians. pay attention to those who lobby and give donations to the various municipal politicians. you'll see that on a municipal level, it's the development industry that has the most to gain from "market liberalization" which generally includes securing greenfield development.
greenfield development is by far the most profitable endeavor for the real estate industry. thus any attempts to enact comprehensive growth boundaries are fought to the death. you could point out the developers who salivate at the prospect of brownfield development, but these are niche players, as brownfield is inherently less lucrative than turning the urban boundaries into new subdivisions.