FROM THE ARCHIVES
[ home | archives | e-mail ]
Illegal beauty, mandatory sprawl
[Bruce Frohnen 03/13 06:07 PM]Kevin raises deeply important issues that receive far too little serious
consideration these days. On the first, our ancestors' ability to make
beautiful, liveable cities, I would defer to others, except to point out
that there is something in each and every one of us, however far buried
these days, that desires a decent, pleasing community. Robert Nisbet wrote
of how the Quest for Community always is with us, only in corrupt form when
its true form becomes unobtainable.
Which brings me to the second point, concerning why it is that we have
sprawl. And it isn't because the free market demands it. Far from it.
Only a few cities do not have zoning laws, and almost all those that do make
real towns, with main streets of shops that have apartments/condos above
them, spiraling out through townhouses and neighborhoods with businesses
mixed in, illegal. Rural sprawl, of which there is a great deal where I
live, has become a particular problem, and can be traced most directly to
government action. Local boards try to stave off suburbanization by having
large lot requirements — e.g. all houses must be on at least 10 acres. Then
the property values get really high, and the pressure builds to lower the
lot size, until you have a bunch of houses on 2 acres or so, sitting in
former corn fields, surrounded by nothing except other 2 acre lots and an
incredibly nasty commute over country roads never intended to carry the
amount of traffic now using them.
Sadly, few townships or counties are willing even to consider the
traditional answer to the problem of increased demand for housing, shopping,
etc. Very few are willing to build new towns. They would have to change
their zoning laws radically, and rethink their aversion to town life, which
they associate with all the bad things brought by big, liberal cities
(crime, high taxes, decaying infrastructure). Even if they did think of
this, however, the laws in most states make it very easy for the nearby city
to annex any town they build, and very, very difficult to incorporate a new
town. So, in classic fashion, you have the government on one side, usually
run by various liberals who see continuing, heavy handed regulation as the
answer to everything, and on the other side voracious developers. And the
public, we the people in our local communities, left nowhere.
It's actually a fairly clear problem with a fairly clear solution, but first
people have to admit that a few big developers do not a free market make,
and that we need to change the laws so that entrepreneurs and communities
can come together to make something decent for all of us.
|
