An article a colleague in the office forwarded to me . . . .
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/05/magazine/305glaeser.1.html
I have no comment since I have not read it yet . . .
UPDATE:
It is always interesting to read about another profession's perspective on issues of urbanism.
Many architects and nostolgic-types may gag on his assertions, but they are nonetheless relevant, epecially in the re-building of New Orleans. Re-thinking zoning laws, the durability of housing, and the necessity of an educated population are all necessary to save some cities, again, like Cleveland.
Here are some of Glaeser's articles:
http://post.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/glaeser/papers.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
BOTC, I whole-heartedly agree with you that Glaeser, as likely the most published and respected urban economist of our time, offers some great wisdom for the city of Cleveland. I think that Cleveland is in fact (thankfully) following some of Glaeser's advice - especially in terms of boosting urban amenities to draw people back into the city - but it sure wouldn't hurt to consider a more radical sea change in city policy. A great resource to draw from, based on my experience, would be The Providence Plan - a public/private/non-profit partnership that has helped the city of Providence prosper and re-urbanize in the past decade or so (link: www.provplan.org).
Post a Comment