Comments by "" (@jasonreed7522) on "Urban Growth Boundaries: Effective or Worthless?" video.

Especially because the easy first step is allowing duplex and similar into the low density mix creating a lowish density that doesn't immediately clash with the ultra low density single family zoning. (Basically its a good weapon against NIMBYs) and once the density starts to rise you can move on up to more dense housing forms with an ideal higher end being "respectful apartments". (Basically have them well maintained and have thick enough walls to not hear your neighbors 99% of the time) Single family homes should be kept to areas that are still walking range to a denser "Mainstreet" feeling area like in small towns. (Basically keep them in small pockets no bigger than 10min walking time to the closest dense edge, and have actual sidewalks + bike infrastructure throughout)
27
It would make more sense if it expanded at certain density breakpoints to encurage areas to all build up to the 3-4 story range before expanding when its actually needed.
3
And then you have pheonix Arizona which is a litteral sea of suburbia in a desert and as such doesn't have much motivation to grow "up" vs "out".
2
I think anyone not born into suburbia hates it for the blight it is, its like trying to live in a city and small town at the same time but only getting the worst of both. Cities generally have lots of amenities and density, small towns generally have a close knit community, nature, and historical character with varried house styles and a classic mainstreet that still resembles photos from the 1800s. Suburbia only has cars and cookie cutter homes, of course everyone hates it.
2
A sidewalk is communism, interesting, i thought it was a mandatory part of any town/city road even if left in bad shape by years of frost and tree roots. They are basically the only form of transit small towns can have other than inter city connections, you would think suburbs pretending to be a "small town feel" would atleast know that much.
1
@HarryLovesRuth very interesting situation, im used to NY where the government owns a large area on either side of the roads, technically its that the road allowance is wider than the built road to account for drainage ditches and sidewalks and what not. (Usually the allowance if 5ft past the edge of the original road they built, beyond that they have to aquire the property through various means from purchasing to eminent domain) I would generally expect that as land gets annexed into a municipality that such amenities as water management infrastructure, sidewalks, ect would be extended to the city/village limits as appropriate. (So when a road gets redone and only to the last house if it is in the budget, but adding a sidewalk can reduce local traffic by alot as you no longer need to walk through people's yards to reach local destinations. Theoretically a good sidewalk has more capacity than a lane of traffic, and certainly is much more pleasant.
1