I always thought the quickest way, and also one of the more robust options, to achieve a space station was to use inflatable modules. Bigalow tested a couple of modules out and I thought it went rather well. They had plans to attach a module to the ISS at one time. But even still it was expensive work, and the pandemic killed them, unfortunately. But I understand the technology demonstration missions were quite successful.
INARS (I Am Not A Rocket Scientist) and obviously it got into testing, but I'd want a long, long test period before I'd entrust anything important to those. Metal modules are an understood quantity, and when they leak, the failure modes are also understood and repairs are usually easy enough if you can find them. A metal module will retain shape and rigidity even if it's unpressured and even if it has a golfball-sized hole in it. I don't know how you repair a depressurized, flopping and clingy waterbed bladder.
Again, I totally recognize that people who are qualified - as I am not - will have considered all of this before they could be deployed, but until then... I wonder.
The cynic in me feels like now that we've past the ten thousandth satellite in just the StarLink constellation with thousands more planned to launch in the next couple of years, that Kessler syndrome will start well before 2030.
With these LitterConstelations(TM), the good news is that they won't impact our long-term access to space because their orbits are so low. The crap from a collision would de-orbit within a few years. The bad news is that they'd de-orbit through the altitude IIS is at. Now, space is big. Really, really big. But math is math. Increasing low-likelihood/high-consequence odds isn't wise.