Colin, the problem I have with the article is a recurring issue. One of the issues an urban planner runs into, after going to school and being accredited is that economists, MBA's and other financial wizards seem to think that they know whats best simply due to the profit motive. The masses back in the 50's through till the 70's thought "housing projects" were the bee knees. So we bought into the model and created giant social issues because of them. The financial world doesn't weigh social issues into its calculations due to many of them are hard to quantify.
A MBA did his job right when he finds a company he can liquidate for a profit, an urban planner did his job right when he cut down your commute time, made the world a more beautiful place and figured out how to make everyone feel at home in a city. Who would you want planning your city?
So when he says suburban offices are more attractive to investors, he's speaking from a dollars and cents attitude. Most suburban offices developers use cheap materials and low end designs to keep costs down but that also makes areas less livable. When creating spaces for people in suburban settings, more time has to be taken to ensure we arent subsidizing the suburbs at the cost of the downtown with cheap unserviced land that will require a larger investment and lower return for the city.
Threaded Mode