ABSTRACT
This conclusion presents some closing thoughts discussed in the preceding chapters of this book. The array of mechanisms developed to date, from attracting jobs to transit, to conventional infill development via redevelopment, to mixed-income development, to organizing against gentrification, can help, but they are simply not powerful enough in the fight against growing income inequality. Infill development is less challenging in parts of the world without strict environmental regulation and public participation processes. Copenhagen has seen an increased pace of infill development due partly to its development around rail, but also because of zoning tools, traffic calming, and the provision of amenities that make urban living appealing. High-density infill development pencils out in global cities such as Melbourne, which, like the Bay Area, has chosen to protect most of its suburbs from density and rely on simple planning and zoning tools to encourage infill development.
