Where do we put new housing for Virginia’s growing population? That’s an enduring public policy issue in Virginia, and it’s become even more pressing as the collapse of housing values in outlying juridictions have exposed the extent to which homeowners prefer shorter commutes and living close to the urban core. Some observers raise the argument that urban areas and inner “suburbs” are fully developed already — there’s no space for new housing. But that argument ignores the potential to re-develop land previously developed at extremely low densities.
Start with parking lots in office parks, suggests a recent study on moderate-income housing in Westchester County, N.Y., according to the New York Times.
Converting office parking lots to housing makes sense in a number of ways. They’re already zoned for high-density occupation. They’re already served by roads and infrastructure. And they create an option for some residents to live near where they work.
We’re seeing similar thinking here in Richmond. Markel Corp., a leading underwriter of specialty insurance products, applied a year or two ago to convert much of its parking lot in the Innsbrook corporate center into housing and retail. The lost parking spaces would be offset by structured parking. (I’m not sure what the status of the project is: It did face some opposition from neighboring residential NIMYs.)
Development that utilizes existing infrastructure is preferable to development that requires new roads and utilities. Likewise, development that integrates mixed uses and connects them with pedestrian-friendly streetscapes so that people can take fewer car trips is preferable to development that segregates land uses, imposes low densities and requires people to drive cars to reach every destination. As Virginia politicians find they can’t raise taxes fast enough to salvage a transportation system that becomes increasingly expensive to maintain with each increase in the price of a barrel of oil and ton of steel, the conclusion is inevitable: People will have to live in closer proximity to one another — hopefully in communities with a balance of jobs, housing, retail and amenities at both the neighborhood and the regional levels.
Ritual disclaimer: I’m not advocating that anyone be forced to live in the kinds of communities they don’t want to live in. I am not advocating social engineering. Indeed, I am advocating the opposite: Municipal governments need to dismantle barriers that prevent developers from building, and people from moving into, the kinds of communities for which the marketplace has documented tremendous latent demand. The alternative, as shown in the transportation-funding plan that Gov. Timothy M. Kaine was expected to roll out at noon today, is to raise taxes to perpetuate a transportation system and pattern of land use that is hopelessly out of date, expensive to maintain and unaffordable to expand.
(Hat tip: Gay Leahy.)