Because my field is local politics and economics, I tend to see things through such eyes.
When I first became interested in local government, there was a concern few were discussing. It went against all conventional wisdom.
The problem was suburbs and urban sprawl. To complain about it was to be a liberal snob.
To me it was about economics. By stretching the distance between single family homes the cost of to home owners and to cities could not help but rise exponentially. This would be caused by too few people supporting to many miles of infrastructure, police calls and fire runs.
Now many cities are in their third cycle of replacing the water, sewer and streets. Many times the costs have risen faster than inflation. On top of that, the demographics of suburbs have changed so those who tend to live there are less able to pay for these escalating costs.
The link discusses new thinking about cities. I have seen this discussed at local planning meetings. The idea that a city prospers by galloping across the fields is an idea that has not panned out.
When I read about church planting, it is invariably about building churches in suburbs. Land is cheaper so the building and the little used parking areas can by purchased.
Actual population growth has, however, turned to the city core. Building higher with more people per square mile to help share the costs is an economic model that has more hope.
Where the church will fit into this new reality seems unknown.