Urban Planning

[iron81]

One of the most valuable services government provides is zoning: specifying which types of construction can go where and separating incompatable types of development, for example, residential and heavy industry. I'll admit I enjoyed the SimCity computer games, which led in part to my current career choice. I've always found that when you build a city with a plan in mind for how it is going to develop, it is much more likely to succeed, and this makes sense in real life as well.

In my area at least, the major failing of urban planning is that it isn't centralized enough. There are over 150 suburbs in the Chicago area, each with near total control over their zoning laws. Just as an example of the problems with this, this means that many communities drive out lower class households by not zoning much multi-family housing or placing heavy restrictions on single family housing. This leads to massive traffic tieups for those commuting from low income areas to high income areas, which still need low income service workers. The state government has recently passed laws requiring municipalities to allow affordable housing construction, but predictably there are too many loopholes to be effective.

[bluesbassman]

[ QUOTE ]
One of the most destructive & oppressive services government provides is zoning: forcing at gunpoint which types of construction can go where and separating incompatable types of development, for example, residential and heavy industry.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP.

[ QUOTE ]

In my area at least, the major failing of urban planning is that it isn't centralized enough. There are over 150 suburbs in the Chicago area, each with near total control over their zoning laws. Just as an example of the problems with this, this means that many communities drive out lower class households by not zoning much multi-family housing or placing heavy restrictions on single family housing. This leads to massive traffic tieups for those commuting from low income areas to high income areas, which still need low income service workers. The state government has recently passed laws requiring municipalities to allow affordable housing construction, but predictably there are too many loopholes to be effective.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that will solve the (alleged) problem: more central planning. After all, it's well known that complex markets such as housing are best served by a strong central planner. Just give them the power and a 5 year plan, and the "problems" will be solved. The bureaucrat kings know best, if we only give them the authority they need.

It's amazing how the philosophy of statism works. First, the local & state bureaucrats distort the housing market by (according to the OP) not "zoning" sufficient multi-family homes and "placing restrictions" on single-family homes, for which, presumably, there is a market. This naturally and inevitably causes problems. According to the statists, if the government only imposed *more* and *better* zoning laws and restrictions, these problems would be solved!

Rather than restricting developers to build this and requiring them to build that, it never seems to occur to them where the fundamental problem lies.

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
One of the most valuable services government provides is zoning: specifying which types of construction can go where and separating incompatable types of development, for example, residential and heavy industry. I'll admit I enjoyed the SimCity computer games, which led in part to my current career choice. I've always found that when you build a city with a plan in mind for how it is going to develop, it is much more likely to succeed, and this makes sense in real life as well.

In my area at least, the major failing of urban planning is that it isn't centralized enough. There are over 150 suburbs in the Chicago area, each with near total control over their zoning laws. Just as an example of the problems with this, this means that many communities drive out lower class households by not zoning much multi-family housing or placing heavy restrictions on single family housing. This leads to massive traffic tieups for those commuting from low income areas to high income areas, which still need low income service workers. The state government has recently passed laws requiring municipalities to allow affordable housing construction, but predictably there are too many loopholes to be effective.

[/ QUOTE ]

Iron,

First off, you're asking for trouble posting this, but something tells me you already know this.

Secondly, and more to your point, I own a house (it's lovely by the way) and I bought the house when property values were at 100k (easy number). If I allow a "bad" neighborhood to sprout up across the street, it will lower my property value considerably. If however, I (and more importantly the zoning board) decide to only allow homes of value >= 200k with brick walls, etc. then I increase the value of my home.

In short, the land around me, and the quality thereof, effects me directly and as such I should have some say in what goes on there.

I'm fairly certain however, given your line of work, that you know all this, so what's the beef?

Cody

[Ron Burgundy]

Here's me playing SimCity:

OH THE MINIONS WANT MORE SCHOOLS DO THEY? WELL GUESS WHAT, IMA RAISE TAXES!!!!! BETTER YET, HOW BOUT IF I JUST KILL THEM ALL WITH A GIANT LIZARD MUAHAHAHAHAHA MMMMMMMMM SWEEET SWEET POWER

[GoodCallYouWin]

Houston is doing just fine without some petty beaurocrats telling people whether or not they can use their own property for something.

[tolbiny]

I'm surprised at you Iron, urban planning and zoning laws major reasons for why low income housing is so far away from high income housing that demands their labor. Zoning laws have frequently been used as tools to keep minorities out of white neighborhoods, restrict the types of restaurants, dry cleaning businesses, make people apply in person so the board gets a good look at them, ect. Sure you can look at Boston and wish they had built it so that roads go in straight lines every now and then, but ultimately "mistakes" like those don't seriously inhibit the cities potential in the way you imply.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's me playing SimCity:

OH THE MINIONS WANT MORE SCHOOLS DO THEY? WELL GUESS WHAT, IMA RAISE TAXES!!!!! BETTER YET, HOW BOUT IF I JUST KILL THEM ALL WITH A GIANT LIZARD MUAHAHAHAHAHA MMMMMMMMM SWEEET SWEET POWER

[/ QUOTE ]

There are other ways to play SimCity?

I prefer volcanoes and UFO attacks to lizards, though.

[HDPM]

Planning and zoning are generally awful. As others have pointed out, the market is much better than government at sorting out uses. Before excessive planning you had things like neighborhood stores, bars, mixed use stuff. Now they have to try to force it. Anyway, others have addressed this. I had the unfortunate experience of serving on our local planning and zoning commission. I did my best to scuttle the dreams of petty communist government functionaries and statist zoning commissioners. I was not always successful, and sometimes got screamed at by the city staffers and such. That was the fun part. The rest sucked. And in this area regulation is relatively light. During that time I came up with a good zoning scheme. I understand the need for some regulation and the fact people want some idea of what can move in next to them. But I simplified some of the classifications. So here is HDPM's Three Zone Plan:


Zone 1: Chemical weapons plants, biological war facilities, nuclear weapons plants, nuclear waste dumps, and things that are similar. We need some flexibility in the law.

Zone 2: CAFOs/dairies/feedlots/hogfarms, landfills, mines, heavy industry.

Zone 3: Other.

[Brooklyn]

Urban Planning and the municipal zoning codes most of you have discussed in this thread are two separate things, and should be treated as such.