Stress neutral land use planning and development

What if we required land use planning and real estate development to be "stress neutral?" In other words, required that how we develop new land not negatively impact people living in that area. Having moved to New Mexico recently, I returned to New Jersey for the holidays. I was struck by the stress created by the traffic, by the loss of a connection to nature, and by sheer density of the activities happening in that area. I love New Mexico because there is still the potential to save it from the poor development that would turn it into the unpleasant urban areas that people are fleeing all across the US. How can we prepare for new development and ensure that it doesn't negatively impact the quality of life of people already living here?

We already have the idea of impact fees. What if there were impact fees assessed to developers to ensure that the quality of life (beyond just the actual direct costs of roads, schools or parks) was maintained? Quality of life is difficult to measure, so what if we used stress as a proxy?

We could do a study of different areas around the country or world. We could segment areas by their existing development pattern and then test the stress levels of the people living there. You could control for other factors and learn some important things about what people need to live without undue stress. And we could then incorporate that into our land use planning and/or apply some kind of impact fee that would discourage the wrong kinds of development and incentivize the right kind.

The Problem of Those Willing to Do Anything

There is a widespread, serious problem out there that we need to do something about.This problem is the existence of people, organizations and systems of people and organizations willing to do anything to protect their power or advance their interest.

Normal people like you and me have a variety of limits that ensure our behaviors are socially valuable at best, or socially acceptable at worst. These limits can be ethical, or come through a fear of punishment, or a fear of social criticism, etc. Unfortunately, there are those out there who have no much limits. They are willing to do whatever it takes. This could mean intimidation, fearmongering, guilt tripping, coercion, and actual violence. The more ruthless a person, organization, or system is, the more their power will grow as they encounter "normal" people who have limits and are not willing to go as far.

This probably doesn't seem all that revolutionary an idea, but I think there are two interesting ideas worth looking at:

1. I have made reference not just to people, but to organizations and systems to draw attention to something I think many people miss: organizations and systems can have a will and interest of their own beyond the individuals that are a part of them, and these organizations and systems can have even bigger, worse impacts than any individual. Consider a mafia/organized crime network. Or consider the military-industrial complex. I know you may not like that term, but it is undeniable that there is an interconnected web or businesses, organizations and people who benefit greatly from war. As a result, this system perpetuate war through various methods including beligerence, creating enemies where there are none, fear-mongering, etc. As a system engaged in war, it is more willing to do anything than other systems (say the child care system, or the religious/faith system). The consequence is that it "wins" political and economic gains against these other systems, using up our tax dollars, creating insecurity and an environment of fear and actual violence.
2. I think we should hold organizations and systems responsible for their actions just like people. We have given corporations the rights of personhood in the US by Supreme Court ruling back in the 1800's, it's time to give them the responsibilities too. An organization or system that murders should face the dealth penalty (e.g. dechartering or dismantling) just like a person would. The only way to stop those willing to do anything is for a large number of people to act in a coordinated way to stop them. Because they are willing to do anything, it is only with sheer numbers and by overwhelming their potential to cause harm that we can win and bring them under control. The next step is bringing them to justice in a court of law. Think about people, organizations and systems you know that are willing to do anything and think about what group of people would be required to stop them. How could that be done? Organize around that. And at the same time, make sure that there are legitimate courts available to bring them to justice. For example, at the international level, do we have the courts we would require? I think not yet.