Sunday, November 14, 2010

"Cookie Cutter Housing: Wrong Mix for Subdivisions" Q&A's

1.       The main point of the article, by Rick Harrison, is his argument against cookie-cutter development. He states clearly throughout the article that the blame for bland subdivision designs should be rested on the commissioners, developers and engineers. Harrison goes on to state that there are many miscommunications between the commission, developers, and engineers. The developers should not fear the commission, while the commission needs to state more clearly what they want from the developers. Engineers should focus the quality of the development instead of the government regulations. Another main point he states in the article is a reward-based system should take over the obsolete system that occurs within the operation.
2.       After reading this article, I still believe subdivisions are a great thing. They are a positive addition to the city layout because they allow residents to live in bigger space. If subdivision didn’t exist, people could be living in apartments downtown or elsewhere. There are many positive factors in subdivision, including enhanced social life and family life. There is one negative factor I foresee in subdivision which is creating boring environment.
3.       I have lived in subdivisions my entire life and never felt it being a bland environment the way Harrison describes. I rarely see bland subdivision the author describes. The author writes this article like he is saying this problem occurs everywhere. I believe the author is exaggerating a problem that occurs in very few cities. Besides the exaggerations, I agree with the author’s philosophy especially his take on the fear of confrontation. Criticism and open-minded discussion are required for things to improve.

No comments:

Post a Comment