The problem with infill development

Infill development, defined by the California Office of Planning and Research as “building within unused and underutilized lands within existing development patterns, typically but not exclusively in urban areas,” is a common argument against Valley’s Edge, and I’m here to tell you why we can’t solely rely on infill development to solve Chico’s housing needs.

It wasn’t very long ago that I saw a face, commonly associated with the Valley’s Edge opposition, come to an Architectural Review and Historic Preservation Board meeting, and argue in opposition of an 8-unit infill development on Humboldt and Wall Street. She couldn’t have said it better, “we have to prioritize historic preservation,” and this is the biggest issue with Infill. Once we fill in all the vacant land in the city core, we are faced with the question, in what historic neighborhood would we have to tear down a block of houses to build apartments, and would those apartments truly fix our housing issues?

I’ve stated in a previous letter the fact a very small percentage of people want to live in apartments, and we have already lost buildings like John Bidwell’s “Chico Roller Flour Mills” building to apartments. The common-sense solution isn’t to destroy our historic city core or our historic neighborhoods, it’s to bring those elements and heritage with us, and build a mixed use, open space oriented and walkable neighborhood within our city sphere. The common-sense solution to our housing issues is to build Valley’s Edge.