Comments on: Smart Growth for Conservatives http://www.smartgrowthforconservatives.com/2014/04/22/smart-growth-for-conservatives-2/ Fiscal and market perspectives on transportation and land use Sat, 05 Sep 2015 11:29:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.8 By: jabacon@baconsrebellion.com http://www.smartgrowthforconservatives.com/2014/04/22/smart-growth-for-conservatives-2/#comment-975 Tue, 22 Apr 2014 17:50:00 +0000 http://www.smartgrowthforconservatives.com/?p=987#comment-975 I agree with you totally, and I suspect Lind does, too. I think he’s arguing against diversity for the sake of diversity, especially when diversity initiatives (usually backed by some form of government subsidy or coercion) undermines strong communities with high levels of trust and mutual support. I elaborated on the point in a follow-up post on Bacon’s Rebellion, which I’ll post to SGFC.

]]> By: Ron http://www.smartgrowthforconservatives.com/2014/04/22/smart-growth-for-conservatives-2/#comment-974 Tue, 22 Apr 2014 17:29:24 +0000 http://www.smartgrowthforconservatives.com/?p=987#comment-974 I agree with much of this post. But one paragraph troubles me a bit. I think I get the intent. That the government shouldn’t mandate diversity. But I disagree that diverse communities (when they happen organically) aren’t almost always a net positive.

It boils down to with TND development you encourage a mix of housing types. A mix of singles, apartments, town homes ect. This means as a byproduct you get a mix of socioeconomic levels living together in one neighborhood. This is a good thing. This is precisely how communities have been traditionally in America. The segregation of income levels in a phenomena that came with sprawl zoning. With sprawl zoning (Euclidean zoning) we are regulating segregated pods.

]]>