Gordon 1999 - “Are Compact Cities a Desirable Planning Goal?”

Gordon, Peter; Richardson Harry W.
“Are Compact Cities a Desirable Planning Goal?”
Journal of the American Planning Association.
Winter 1997: v.63, n.1; pp.95-105.
On the Web
Relevance: low

Gordon and Richardson dispute the need for promoting compact development (see Ewing (1997) for a rebuttal).  They claim that standard suburban development:

• does not encroach on prime agricultural land,
• is preferred by consumers,
• is not less efficient for travel than compact development,
• does not consume more energy (and energy is not scarce),
• does not increase congestion (an may, in fact, reduce it), and
• does not increase infrastructure and public service costs.

They also claim that:

• auto travel is less subsidized than is public transit,
• telecommunications make geography less relevant;
• lower transportation and communications costs make the high cost of high density less cost-efficient;
• most commuting is now suburb-to-suburb, not suburb-to-city; and
• downtown renewal projects are often disappointing.