Redevelopment of private property in urban areas is generally a good thing for the regional economy, as is renewal of public infrastructure. It can be good for people and the environment too, if there are well-thought-out and well-implemented policies in place to make sure that is the case. But when those policies are not in place, or when enlightened and well-intentioned policies founder on the rocks of change-resistant and dysfunctional institutions that are supposed to implement them, I think the default is that this is not the case. Case in point: Seattle is experiencing a redevelopment boom, and has set goals to increase its tree canopy, but the development boom has resulted in a loss of tree canopy. The city is considering measures to try to reverse that trend. I would like to see my city (Philadelphia), which is also experiencing a development boom and (anecdotally, at least, from what I see with my own eyes) also losing trees, take similar measures. But after seeing a number of enlightened and well-intentioned local policies founder on the rocks of poor implementation, my confidence in the city’s political and bureaucratic leadership at the moment is not particularly high.