Quote:
Originally Posted by trew
You will use more water (lawns) and it will cost much more money to pump it to your house, and then drain it back for water treatment. You will generate more trash to buy materials for your larger house and your larger yard. Also, the garbage trucks will have to drive much further to your house to get your garbage, costing both time and money and likely requiring extra vehicles.
|
I barely ever water my lawn. It's not substantially bigger than the lawn of a smaller house in an inner city neighbourhood. As houses have gotten bigger, lots have gotten smaller.
My house is 30 years old. Construction debris from it is long gone. Buying it was way better for the environment than buying an inner city home, ripping it down, and building an attached infill, which was the alternative.
Finally, garbage trucks for my house drive much less distance than garbage trucks servicing sunnyside. The landfill (spy hill) is on the NW outskirts. My house is much closer to that, and so the trucks travel much shorter distances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trew
Also the funding collected by Sunnyside residents for education (there is a dedicated mill rate for this), will dwarf the amount of money actually spent on education in the community by several factors. (The taxes raised per student in the community is likely several factors greater than Hawkwood).
I've also heard that there is a waiting list for the Sunnyside school. Perhaps if the education system wasn't hemorrhaging money, it could spare some funds for expansion in the inner city?
|
I'm sure sunnyside does cover it's educational costs. It has high property values, so it pays high property taxes. It also costs more to educate children in a small, old school. Is it your contention that rich neighbourhoods should get to spend more money per pupil than poor neighbourhoods? That's defensible, but I bet if we took a city wide vote most people would think that rich and poor students should be treated equally.