These milquetoast articles either all bury the lede or simply never get to the main issue.
If real estate is the biggest expense line in a typical household, how much money would it cost to rebuild entire communities across the country? Trillions of dollars. At least. Millions of work-hours.
It's probably cheaper to build new communities that foster this kind of child activity than to rebuild existing suburban stroad hellscapes. Many communities have barely enough money to keep the infrastructure from falling apart, how do you plan on rebuilding those?
And that's no guarantee of success either. A lot of millennials and younger are just incredibly lazy (or too busy) physically and are in poor shape to enjoy the outdoors. I frequently find myself to be the most fit of several groups despite using the gym last time before COVID.
> It's probably cheaper to build new communities that foster this kind of child activity than to rebuild existing suburban stroad hellscapes. Many communities have barely enough money to keep the infrastructure from falling apart, how do you plan on rebuilding those?
This is extraordinarily easy actually. You eliminate residential zoning. Every house can now partake in limited commercial activity. Want to start a cafe? No problem. Want to start a barbershop? Sure. Massage studio, yes. Doctor office, yes. Office? Sure. Small grocery stor.? Absolutely.
We can have moderate limitations for parking and congestion, but no actual restrictions on what can take place. This will immediately raise property and income taxes which can be reinvested into infrastructure. In the meantime, there's no need to immediately deal with stroads. People will be using the stroads less since they can get a significant portion of needs met locally.
This is not a radical proposal. We already allow some home-based businesses and they do fine, like daycares, etc.
Once the stroads are less used, and people mostly shopping locally, then we can narrow the stroads bit by bit and turn them into nice proper commercial districts.
That's hypocritical. You want to eliminate residential zoning, but that's not necessary in order to allow home businesses.
Your scenario is also NOT why politicians are attacking residential areas; if you look at corrupt legislation like California's SB 9/10, it allows ONE house to be replaced by a 10-unit monstrosity without permits or any vetting or veto power by municipalities. So trees get wiped out, ground is paved over, and heat islands expand.
"then we can narrow the stroads bit by bit and turn them into nice proper commercial districts."
Now you want "proper commercial districts" but not residential "districts?"
>Your scenario is also NOT why politicians are attacking residential areas; if you look at corrupt legislation like California's SB 9/10, it allows ONE house to be replaced by a 10-unit monstrosity without permits or any vetting or veto power by municipalities.
Sure. That's because California didn't follow my suggestions until they hit an emergency stage. If they had made sensible stepwise decisions they wouldn't have to make drastic ones.
It's like all the cities who defunded the police suddenly deciding to up funding beyond where it used to be.
If they had been sensible they would have kept funding stable while implementing stepwise reform. Instead they goofed and now have to spend more for less
> The City Council responded by cutting $15 million. An additional $12 million was cut due to pandemic-caused economic shortfalls. As a result, school resource officers, transit police and a gun violence reduction team — which was found to disproportionately target Black Portland residents during traffic stops, according to an audit in March 2018 — were disbanded.
So we've established the council cut enough funds that several major teams were defunded, including the gun violence team, the transit police, and school resource officers. This is not a nominal reduction, but an actual elimination.
Secondly, we establish that they refunded the departments:
> Now, a year and a half later, officials partially restored the cut funds. On Wednesday, the Portland City Council unanimously passed a fall budget bump that included increasing the current $230 million police budget by an additional $5.2 million.
Similar things happened in other communities:
> In the wake of protests, the Los Angeles City Council cut $150 million from the police budget, promising to put that money into other social services. Likewise, in New York City lawmakers approved a shift of $1 billion from policing to education and social services. At the time the NYPD budget was around $6 billion, with several billion dollars more in shared city expenses such as pensions. However, since the cut, concerns about crime led to about $200 million in restored funding.
> This is extraordinarily easy actually. You eliminate residential zoning.
I've yet to see zoning become less restrictive in communities that actually have the money to start their own businesses. It's an interesting paradox.
The only advance I've seen so far is some localities began to allow building ADUs, in very limited capacity in hopes to alleviate housing shortages. But that's so local and so sparse that it's not going to make any kind of impact like the article suggests.
In the US it is not as easy as that and the zoning requirements are so anti-white and anti-Christian home schooling, and anti-Black and anti-immigrant for home businesses to support unions and retirees.
It's not a radical proposal, but stroads aren't the problem, carefully targeted regulations aren't the problem, communities/villages may be a solution?
If real estate is the biggest expense line in a typical household, how much money would it cost to rebuild entire communities across the country? Trillions of dollars. At least. Millions of work-hours.
It's probably cheaper to build new communities that foster this kind of child activity than to rebuild existing suburban stroad hellscapes. Many communities have barely enough money to keep the infrastructure from falling apart, how do you plan on rebuilding those?
And that's no guarantee of success either. A lot of millennials and younger are just incredibly lazy (or too busy) physically and are in poor shape to enjoy the outdoors. I frequently find myself to be the most fit of several groups despite using the gym last time before COVID.