The Headline-Content Missing Link

In yet another AZCentral piece, today by Joanna Allhands, entitled, “Careful what you wish for, Scottsdale,” the issue of ‘crowding’ gets more flogging.

I’m not really sure what to make of this tome. It’s like there’s a paragraph missing somewhere.

Clearly Ms. Allhands isn’t up-to-speed on some of these Scottsdale issues. Certainly the headline writer (the reporters don’t do that part, which can lead to some humorous juxtapositions) didn’t understand the point she was trying to make, either. So I don’t feel too bad.

As I commented on Parker Leavitt’s article yesterday, the debate isn’t about ‘crowding’ (whatever that is) versus…’non-crowding?’ It’s about what the citizens of Scottsdale get for sacrificing some of our historic low density and quality of life in exchange for high-density housing. I say ‘nothing,’ because it isn’t an economically sustainable business model. Growth doesn’t pay for itself. That’s especially true in a community whose economy is based on tourism, in turn driven by our physical character.

I think Ms. Allhands is saying Scottsdale can’t have growth without having either crowding or better mass transit, including light rail. The ‘better’ adjective is highly debatable when it comes to rail, and I would assert that it doesn’t apply. But she is sadly mistaken if she thinks the members of our city council, city staff, developers, and rail contractors have given up that fight. Just ask Virginia Korte.

Joanna, let’s get you up to speed on some of this. Then we can go about fixing the headlines.

You may also like

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.