The reading experience was a bit of a grind, which is why it took me nearly 6 months to complete. However, there were lots of really nice bits within it. I truly long for neighborhoods that are absent from subdivisions, shopping centers, highways, and all the other harbingers of sprawl. I find myself disagreeing with some or perhaps most of the pro-growth and pro-profit sentiments. I firmly believe that these attitudes are deeply embedded in the issues of sprawl. Moreover, they make the argument of the centralizing role of the generalist/citizen less convincing. It seems that the focus on growth and profit often overshadows the importance of creating more sustainable and livable communities. We need to reevaluate our priorities and consider the long-term consequences of our actions. Only then can we hope to build neighborhoods that are not only aesthetically pleasing but also functional and inclusive.
An honest evaluation of our current "best practices guide" for development in this country is of utmost importance. The guide is supposed to serve as a valuable resource, providing clear directions and strategies for progress. However, upon closer inspection, several areas of improvement can be identified.
Firstly, the guide may lack comprehensiveness. It might not cover all aspects of development, such as social, environmental, and economic dimensions, in a holistic manner. This narrow focus could limit its effectiveness in promoting sustainable and inclusive growth.
Secondly, the language used in the guide could be more accessible. It may be too technical or jargon-laden, making it difficult for non-experts to understand and implement the recommended practices. Simplifying the language and using more practical examples would enhance its usability.
Finally, the guide should be regularly updated to reflect the latest trends, technologies, and experiences in development. What was considered "best practice" yesterday may not be relevant today. By keeping the guide current, it can better serve as a reliable tool for decision-making and action.
While the first half of this book was truly an engaging and fast-paced read that had me periodically nodding passionately in agreement, the second half turned out to be such a slog that it felt as if I was reading an entirely different book. In some respects, reading a book about urbanism from the year 2000 can seem a bit dated. This is especially true since I am not quite learned enough in this discipline to clearly parse out what is outdated from what is still relevant. In the end, the book adopts a Florida-heavy, moderate approach. It focuses a great deal more on larger scale development rather than on the kind of infill that is typically seen in Silicon Valley. Overall, it wasn't a complete waste of time, but I am indeed glad that I finally managed to finish it so that I can move on with my life.