Eating the dirt of developers

As critical as I sound, there are some developers and architects for whom I have a great deal of respect, whether or not I agree with every aspect of every project they do. Still, there are some developers and their representatives who want to make as much money as possible with as little outlay as possible, with little concern for the lasting nature of the project and its impact on the built environment.

Given something I was working on yesterday (creating a model retail plan for a commercial district to use to shape the retail plan for a project within it, as an indirect submission to the Zoning Commission) this Dallas Observer article, "Eat My Dirt," with the explanatory subtitle "A builder's guide to skirting the zoning laws and making the city look goofy," seems particularly apt.

Developers and their agents often make representations that aren't supportable by facts. Generally, most claims employing the words "green," "affordable housing," "workforce housing," and "high quality retail" are often suspect. But there are few opportunities for pointed questioning of the claims.

Here it's not always that zoning laws are skirted, but that the zoning regulations don't demand very much. And often as not, the Office of Planning is prevented from really holding the feet of developers to the fire so that great projects can be obtained.

Another problem is that zoning regulations often allow greater height and density for lots than how the buildings and lots were developed decades ago. This sets up a disconnect and the pressure for demolition and the rebuilding (or expansion of extant buildings) of supersized monstrosities.

It doesn't help that the designs tend to be bad as well...