[PEN-L:3862] Re: subsidies for sprawl

[Lisa Rogers <eqwq.lrogers@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Here's another approach, or set of costs, I read once in some urban
planning lit, tho I don't recall the exact source.  Municipal
governments are largely run by big developers and builders and such.
So, municipalities often have both zoning rules and tax incentives
that encourage and reward sprawl, rather than the use of vacant,
abandoned and unused land in city centers, which sometimes approaches
60% of the area.

This is what developers want, as long as it is more profitable for
them to sprawl, building low-density, high cost housing, malls and
such.  Tax incentives can make it yet more profitable.  Even better
for them if they are outside of requirements to install curb, gutter,
sidewalk, streetlights, sewer connections, etc.

One of the many costs is that cities lose tax income from the
construction that could have occurred within the city, business from
revitalized downtown areas, not to mention/measure air pollution from
more commuting, inefficiency of public transport for very low density
areas, unaffordability of big houses on big lots for most people,
etc.  Of course the city councillors and such are all lining their
campaign chests, and investing in real estate ...

Lisa