Zoning codes in much of the US do indeed prohibit mixed uses and urban densities and prioritize automotive infrastructure over human-scale street design. The cost for obtaining the necessary adjustments and exemptions by the usual permitting process could be prohibitive, but the law is just the most obvious obstacle.
There are entrenched business interests who fight vigorously to maintain the status quo. From site preparation crews to homebuilders to civil engineers to government bureaucrats, many people have invested over half a century in learning to do things in a certain, profitable, way and they do not want expensive and risky change.
Then there are ordinary people, who will oppose "cut through" traffic and dense (or any) neighboring development and commercial uses (next door though not across town). When they think retail, they think strip mall, and who can blame them for not wanting to live next to that? They want to preserve their property values by only permitting (more expensive and lower density) houses and green space on adjacent parcels. Most people don't care about things on non-adjacent parcels, although they will tend to dislike elitists or outta-towners who want to do something unusual in their regional vicinity.
We have an elaborate, comprehensive, uniform set of ideas and practices that are very well established in this country. Their scope is huge, governing everything from the (non)existence of street trees to the geometry of interstates. Although it's true that urban site designs complement each other, the problem with new urbanism is not that planning or design cannot work on larger scales. Pre-industrial towns and cities evolved urban design locally and without specialized professional oversight. Suburbia may not seem thoughtfully designed, but it is an existence proof that even ideas that do not work well at scale can nonetheless be widely adopted and carry enormous momentum.
> Zoning codes in much of the US do indeed prohibit mixed uses and urban densities and prioritize automotive infrastructure over human-scale street design.
The vast majority of the US has no zoning.
You're seeing obstacles because you're only looking at existing areas. It's quite reasonable for the current inhabitants to resist your takeover attempt. And yes, that's what it is.
> Suburbia may not seem thoughtfully designed, but it is an existence proof that even ideas that do not work well at scale can nonetheless be widely adopted and carry enormous momentum.
Suburbia works quite well for the vast majority of its inhabitants. This "scale" claim is just your attempt to try to convince them why they're wrong.
And yes, suburbia is "thoughtfully designed" - it just isn't designed to accomplish the goals that you value.
Your values are not universal. If suburbia doesn't work for you, get out. There are options.
But, stop trying to force people into your vision. And if you can't, at least stop complaining that they resist.
There are entrenched business interests who fight vigorously to maintain the status quo. From site preparation crews to homebuilders to civil engineers to government bureaucrats, many people have invested over half a century in learning to do things in a certain, profitable, way and they do not want expensive and risky change.
Then there are ordinary people, who will oppose "cut through" traffic and dense (or any) neighboring development and commercial uses (next door though not across town). When they think retail, they think strip mall, and who can blame them for not wanting to live next to that? They want to preserve their property values by only permitting (more expensive and lower density) houses and green space on adjacent parcels. Most people don't care about things on non-adjacent parcels, although they will tend to dislike elitists or outta-towners who want to do something unusual in their regional vicinity.
We have an elaborate, comprehensive, uniform set of ideas and practices that are very well established in this country. Their scope is huge, governing everything from the (non)existence of street trees to the geometry of interstates. Although it's true that urban site designs complement each other, the problem with new urbanism is not that planning or design cannot work on larger scales. Pre-industrial towns and cities evolved urban design locally and without specialized professional oversight. Suburbia may not seem thoughtfully designed, but it is an existence proof that even ideas that do not work well at scale can nonetheless be widely adopted and carry enormous momentum.