> You can't take a good neighborhood and make it bigger and keep the good I suppose this is true, but I don’t feel like it contradicts the option of: instead o

> You can't take a good neighborhood and make it bigger and keep the good I suppose this is true, but I don’t feel like it contradicts the option of: instead of making a good neighborhood very large, building many small neighborhoods. This was the principle of the scaling of the Web back when it was agreed to be pretty good, and it is in a sense the principle of the scaling of the United States (and most governments). As an added bonus, most people would live closer to places to work and shop, since each neighborhood must necessarily have those, rather than being in the far-flung reaches of sprawl. The only trick then, I guess, is the neighborhoods do need to be small.