Market Urbanism

Liberalizing cities | From the bottom up

“Market Urbanism” refers to the synthesis of classical liberal economics and ethics (market), with an appreciation of the urban way of life and its benefits to society (urbanism). We advocate for the emergence of bottom up solutions to urban issues, as opposed to ones imposed from the top down.

“Cockamamie” Neighborhood Zones

By

Thanks to loyal reader, DBM for the tip on the photo link.

David Weigel – Highway to the Neighborhood Zones refers to DCist – Police to Seal Off D.C. Neighborhoods

The Examiner has the scoop on a controversial new program announced today that would create so-called “Neighborhood Safety Zones” which would serve to partially seal off certain parts of the city. D.C. Police would set-up checkpoints in targeted areas, demand to see ID and refuse admittance to people who don’t live there, work there or have a “legitimate reason” to be there.

Shelley Broderick, president of the D.C.-area American Civil Liberties Union and the dean of the University of the District of Columbia’s law school, said the plan was “cockamamie.”

“I think they tried this in Russia and it failed,” she said.

Good luck opening a business and bringing jobs to those areas if customers have to pass through a checkpoint every time they enter the zone. I can’t see things getting any better in these neighborhood zones.

Almost sounds like an exclusive luxury community. If they want their neighborhood sealed off, they could buy the streets from the district, build a wall, and hire their own private security. But, I assume it’s not a luxury community and they can’t afford their security.

Comments

  1. Actually, you have to show ID at Costco to get in, too. To say nothing of airports.

    But, devil’s advocate argument here, couldn’t one say that if people want higher densities, then they should buy the streets from the city and then build whatever they please?

  2. Actually, you have to show ID at Costco to get in, too. To say nothing of airports.

    But, devil’s advocate argument here, couldn’t one say that if people want higher densities, then they should buy the streets from the city and then build whatever they please?

  3. What is the rationale behind this? There has to be some sort of issue going on in the neighborhoods affected to create this proposal.

    In any case it sounds completely ridiculous to me, no matter how well-intentioned the plan was.
    And let me guess, since it’s a public service the tax payers of the entire city will be footing the bill for the “protected” few.

    Why did this recent Digg post just come to mind??…..
    http://wuntvor.mirror.waffleimages.com/files/44/44cb4b91287cfcd8111d471867502a3cac861ab0.jpg

  4. What is the rationale behind this? There has to be some sort of issue going on in the neighborhoods affected to create this proposal.

    In any case it sounds completely ridiculous to me, no matter how well-intentioned the plan was.
    And let me guess, since it’s a public service the tax payers of the entire city will be footing the bill for the “protected” few.

    Why did this recent Digg post just come to mind??…..
    http://wuntvor.mirror.waffleimages.com/files/44/44cb4b91287cfcd8111d471867502a3cac861ab0.jpg

Meta