Oh god, not again: the "density debate"

Does 'smart growth' also create more sprawl?

The problem with this piece and the whole pro- or anti-density discussion of which it is part: Urging density is putting the cart before the horse. The task is to create interesting places. Then people will compete to be there. You don't start by creating density. You create interesting urban places and then people will want to be there and developers will build. Density is a byproduct of creating interesting places. Density is a by-product of high-amenity environments. Consider any waterfront location. Or a neighborhood like Madison Park. Do you really think that you have to encourage density in either place? Hardly. People want to be there, they compete to be there, and you have to beat them off with a stick. The public policy debate should be about how to create interesting urban spaces. So long as the zoning allows density, the market will take care of it.

And I wish people would be a bit more selfish when it comes to this discussion. The right reason to like density is that it is associated with more interesting cities. The wrong reason is because it is better for society and is more sustainable etc etc.