Virginia to crackdown on cul-de-sacs in neighborhoods

[Evadman]

Whon't someone think of Ed, Edd and Eddy? Where will they go? What about Johnny?

 

[CPA]

yeah for more intrusive government.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: CPA
yeah for more intrusive government.

The opposite is true, actually. You can build your roads however you want, and the government won't intrude on them with their maintenance equipment and snowplows. There's no reason the government should have to pay for roads that are intentionally designed to be useless to all but a few people.

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: lxskllr
The problem with them is they allow too much development to be crammed into a small area. The surrounding infrastructure can't support all the houses that are artificially placed by using cul-de-sacs

What? Cul-de-sacs actually take up more land per house which is why they are sought after and the most pricey lots. You want to talk about cramming houses a cul-de-sac is the last place to look.

that's uh exactly what he means. Too much space taken up by too few people.

And that's a bad thing?

In terms of "surrounding infrastructure", yes.

Also makes public transportation in the US fucking IMPOSSIBLE.

I'm not sure how to say this...but...you are stupid.

If you want public transportation, go move to a city.

 

[Slew Foot]

Cul-de-sac= higher demand=higher value=higher taxes= government services paid for

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Basically the government doesn't want to spend its public money maintaining the streets of what is essentially a private community. If the private community wants roads that the public traffic can't use (because the roads don't go anywhere) then they should pay the maintenance costs themselves.

Pretty much sums up the thread.

:thumbsup:

 

[shortylickens]

I live in Virginia and didnt hear anything about this until the DC papers started talking about it.

Am seriously amazed that with all the real problems we have people waste time worrying about this crap.

 

[lupi]

Another reason to count down the days till that dumbass kaine is out of office.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: lupi
Another reason to count down the days till that dumbass kaine is out of office.

Unfortunately he still has the rest of the year to screw with us while trying to turn the state into a lab for the DNC's pet projects.

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: Jumpem

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: Jumpem
Around here alot of the zoning requires minimum 3-5 acre lot size per dwelling.

Requires? WTF? why?

To keep the areas from becoming over developed.

3-5 acre per family is no where near sparse 🙂 One acre lot I can sort of see, but 3-5 is pet farm size...

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: shortylickens
I live in Virginia and didnt hear anything about this until the DC papers started talking about it.

Am seriously amazed that with all the real problems we have people waste time worrying about this crap.

Just because the economy is tanking, it doesn't mean the rest of the problems don't need dealing with. This does create more jobs, theoretically. Realistically it just goes to the pocket of the players.

 

[sao123]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: CPA
yeah for more intrusive government.

The opposite is true, actually. You can build your roads however you want, and the government won't intrude on them with their maintenance equipment and snowplows. There's no reason the government should have to pay for roads that are intentionally designed to be useless to all but a few people.

:thumbsup: