13,289
edits
Family Living Act of 2003: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
==Impact== | ==Impact== | ||
===Growth of the exurbs=== | ===Growth of the exurbs=== | ||
With significant areas of [[The Valley (Urcea)|the Valley]] marked as preservation zones, construction of housing had to shift to further afield. The various provisions of the FLA inaugurated a new era of home construction in Urcea, as new, very-low-density exurban developments began to be planned in compliance with the building code changes under the FLA. A second wave of subdivision construction occurred beginning in 2005 and ending in 2014, bringing a large number of new subdivisions to the outer portions of the Valley and parts of the [[Urcean frontier]]. Unlike the previous century's developments, special care was taken in the construction of these subdivisions to be compliant with the FLA's intent to preserve greenspace, a provision that also necessarily led to larger average property sizes for homeowners in 2025 as compared to 1985. The more traditional exurban street model combined with the rapid construction of urban-town-and-country style developments to move many Urceans out of the suburbs and into more cohesive, if further, residential communities. | |||
===Death of suburban development=== | ===Death of suburban development=== | ||
The building code requirements and preservation zone provisions within the FLA marked the effective death of the legal construction of traditional suburban subdivisions. While construction on medium-density suburbs had | |||
===Rise of the UTCs=== | ===Rise of the UTCs=== | ||
===Sociological improvements=== | ===Sociological improvements=== | ||
Throughout the 2010s, various studies were conducted to measure if the changes in neighborhood composition had made an impact on feelings of social isolation and estate cohesion. | Throughout the 2010s, various studies were conducted to measure if the changes in neighborhood composition had made an impact on feelings of social isolation and estate cohesion. | ||
The creation of more walkable UTC-style towns and villages had significant recorded impacts on the health of the average Urcean, with UTC residents walking, on average, 72% more than suburb residents. The success of UTC retail establishments, combined with mass transit options built into many UTCs, is often credited with this disparity. | |||
==Criticism and opposition== | ==Criticism and opposition== | ||