Saturday, May 13, 2006
Is this about oil prices, land use, or neighborhood aesthetics?
May 12, 2006
The following was from a comment thread originally responding to an editorial in The New Republic. (They advocated raising taxes on SUVs.)
The pro-smart growth people aren't calling for central planning (other than from cities, which can and should plan their development). When you talk about "forcing" people into smart growth development, you've got the idea backwards.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I own land inside the UGB, I am limited by the high-density zoning laws. I can't build a house on a one acre plot. And similarly , outside the UGB, I can't build a house at all, no matter what size the plot. That sounds like forcing people into hubs to me.
Contemporary development in suburbs and exurbs subsidizes irresponsible growth (developers don't pay for new infrastructure, for example, which is a subsidy for horizontal growth).
I alluded to that in another active thread, most areas are reluctant to zone because schools cost money. The same is also true for roads and sewage. But interestingly enough, you are not allowed to put a septic tank in your land by the same zoning laws! Nor are private companies allowed to get into the sewage and water business. The towns use these as their way to retain control over your property.
If we had stronger property rights that vastly curtailed the power of land use boards to dictate what you can build, then I suspect that the market would take care of things. For example, even in our current environment homeowners' associations are thriving. Developers would buy land, install the necessary roads and services, create the initial charter for the HOA, and then sell lots.
Instead, rent-seeking town magnets know that they can practically print money by getting zoning variances, and pay local politicians handsomely for the privilege.
-jibaholic
I wanted to mention earlier, but didn't, my experience in New Mexico a couple of years ago. The state has, as jibaholic likes to put it, "property rights," meaning virtually no zoning laws outside of the cities. The result was people with scrap heaps all over their yards - a really terrible visual nuisance. Unless you want to live next to people who want to put waste dumps in their yards, you should be careful about how strenuously you advocate property rights.
--aaron_berger
The presence of the auto wrecker to the right of me means that the recent immigrants to the left of me can afford to live in a house with a yard and send their children to the same schools my children attend. The same schools as the children across the street whose ancestors lived here before Europeans arrived. Come to think of it, almost all the houses in this area (including the auto wreckers') have kids growing up in diversity you easterners can only daydream about. So as they grow up, my kids have the advantage of knowing people whose backgrounds are different from theirs. If they become politicians or lawyers or sociologists, they'll be able to see others as more than numbers on a chart.
None of which really has anything to do with gas prices, but neither did your comment.
--(me)
It's funny that you assume I'm a protected easterner. Actually, I grew up in the Minneapolis area and just finished college in Des Moines, Iowa. I live in one of the poorest neighborhoods in Des Moines, although it is beginning to become gentrified. I share a community garden with neighbors who use it to grow food because they need to save money on their groceries. I bet we have a lot more in common in terms of socioeconomic diversity than you think.
All I know is that when I went to New Mexico, I saw a lot of the most severe poverty I've ever seen in the United States. When I saw junk yards in peoples' yards, I'm not talking about auto wreckers. I'm sure you know more about New Mexico than I do, since it sounds like you live there, but I saw scrap heaps in almost every yard in a small town out by Chaco Canyon. That is the result of no zoning laws. I bet people like jibaholic don't exactly have that in mind when they advocate unlimited property rights.--aaron_berger
Aaron Berger graduated from Drake University last week. Not surprisingly, he is on MySpace and has a personal blog as well. He really has a thoughtful side, so I don't mean to single him out for ridicule.
If I were to continue this exchange, I would have to point out that from a New Mexico perspective the east starts at around the Colorado-Nebraska border. This far west, front-yard scrap heaps are a socially acceptable expression of individual property rights. I don't know about "jibaholic," but a true western civil libertarian doesn't look to interfere with his or her neighbor's aesthetic decisions.
Yes, the appearance of the yards in the rural four corners area does indicate poverty. It also indicates a set of priorities that is bound to seem outlandish to an eastern or midwestern sensibility. To get back to the original context, the scrap heaps also mark the presence of cheap land. Sort of like in the upper midwest, where farmers used to put up a brand new barn or silo right next to the old decrepit structure they were replacing -- often without bothering to tear down the old one. The difference here is that they are more likely to patch and reuse the old building.
To me, and I differ from A.B. in generation as well as locale, the trashy yards in New Mexico are an issue more of social control (we practice less) than of land use.
: 9:15 AM << Home
