4 ms·
TL;DR: Suburbs are a Ponzi scheme because roads are too expensive? I'm sorry but this doesn't make very much sense. ELI5?
by kanox 6y ago
TL;DR: Suburbs are a Ponzi scheme because roads are too expensive?
I'm sorry but this doesn't make very much sense. ELI5?
- greenonions 6y agoGovernments fund road construction with large portions of federal grants. The property taxes of many communities are nowhere near enough to maintain all of the infrastructure that they have built indefinitely. So we are constantly building things we cannot maintain with current tax rates. Also, roads don't generate enough economic activity to offset their costs.
- epistasis 6y agoThis prior article goes into more detail: https://www.strongtowns.org/the-growth-ponzi-scheme https://www.strongtowns.org/the-growth-ponzi-scheme The author is a civil engineer that got involved with trying to make the budgetary ends meet in his town. He concludes that the suburban development is easy and cheap to build, but it's too difficult to find the maintenance, which is why we have a huge amount of infrastructure that is falling apart. He advocates for more sustainable development styles, that depend on less infrastructure, such as neighborhoods that are designed to be walkable for everyday needs. I agree with him on aesthetic grounds, to me there is nothing worse than the suburban development style where there is nothing to do at your house except drive to big box stores. I want walk ability to my everyday needs, without having to drive. So I don't know about his economic arguments (but trust that he's done his homework), and really I just want more walkable neighborhoods for health and humanity.
- leetcrew 6y agothe basic thesis of strongtowns is that property tax in less dense areas is not enough to cover the cost of infrastructure. I'm not sure I'm convinced by their conclusion, but it's easy to see why a stretch of road in a city generates much more tax revenue than the same length of road in a suburb. the city block I live on has about 30 rowhouses, each of them worth about $300k. a similar stretch of road out in the suburbs might have ten larger detached homes that are each worth about the same amount of money. if the property tax rate is the same in the suburb, the government is drawing on only a third of the tax receipts to maintain that same length of road.
- valuearb 6y agoLarger detached homes are individually worth far more than townhouses.
- MiroF 6y agoThe average townhouse is worth more than the average detached home because of where you find each type.
- leetcrew 6y agoif you had a large detached home in my city neighborhood, yes, it would be far more valuable. it wouldn't be more valuable than all the rowhouses you could have fit on the same lot though.
- earthboundkid 6y agoIn what jurisdiction? E.g. Baltimore: - https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4219-Wickford-Rd-Baltimore-MD-21210/36479155_zpid/ https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4219-Wickford-Rd-Baltimor... $489K, 2,200sqft - https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1040-N-Calvert-St-Baltimore-MD-21202/2079632750_zpid/ https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1040-N-Calvert-St-Baltimo... $494K, 3,900sqft ISTM, you pay more to detach your house, but most of the price goes into location+square footage.
- valuearb 6y agoExactly, land is expensive. The same quality detached home will always net a premium over same size townhome because of the additional land included.
- pnutjam 6y agoOnly in expensive urban areas, not in smaller towns and cities.
- valuearb 6y agoThe difference is less in less dense areas where land is cheaper, but the extra land associated with detached homes always adds value.