Peter Cresswell puts an interesting new log on the fire over at his site. Click here for his arguments in favour of sprawl.
From Mr Cresswell:
And "how affordable will it be to live in his sprawling, car-dependent suburbs when oil prices soar even higher?" Well, isn't the future affordability or unaffordability up to those who choose to live in these sprawling, car-dependent suburbs, and to invest in their own future?
After all, neither Tom Beard nor Dick Hubbard nor Al Bore nor any planner anywhere in the world has a direct line to the future. Freedom means we're each allowed to plan our own futures, with the full knowledge of our own context, our own lives, and our own hopes and dreams, and -- provided we don't initiate force against anyone else -- we should all be free to do so.
Tangential to the sprawl argument, he slings in some for gated communities.
I get really tired of these arguments that basically boil down to "fine! we'll take our bat and ball and leave!" - same old reason as ever, they'll be back as soon as they get screwed looking for a handout to get them back on their feet.
And despite what he claims, privatised utilities are more often than not simply not working in the real world - water anyone?
<i>Tangential to the sprawl argument, he slings in some for gated communities."</i>
Oddly enough, I don't mention gated communities at all. What I do mention is choice. When it comes to letting people live the way they wish to live, I am pro-choice. THAT in essence is "the sprawl argument." But read the rest if you want the rest of the argument.
<i><"Privatised utilities are more often than not simply not working in the real world"</i>
I agree - absolutely hilarious!