Originally Posted by
PlanoFuji
We are not dealing with a tabula rasa; but rather existing conditions, so for the purposes of this thread the best solution for the environment is xeriscaping the yards. Yards do not require manicured lawns to be attractive; indeed many folks (like myself) think xeriscaped yards are more attractive than the traditional manicured lawn.
Further, whole communities are not subject to some 'master plan'. At best planning and zoning can provide a guideline and rules; however the actual development is done by the private sector (at least in the west). The result is that rules that reduce lot size also tend to increase densities and reduce open space along with other unintended consequences. In large part because yards are actually still open space, and open space does not generate the revenue that developed land does.
One of my points is that increasing density
does increase open spaces, because of the land you are
not using. And the built urban form is not static - communities are continually evolving, and usually, densifying. And even if people want large lots, you can maximize the impact - you get more green for your buck if you make the lots long and narrow rather than square, because you need fewer streets.
Edit: here's a sketch on the left showing two city blocks of square lots. The black bars are streets. On the right, if you make the lots long and narrow instead of squarish, you can give everybody at least the same acreage, but you can get rid of one of the streets, so much less pavement.
Sorry, a couple of lines got lost in the upload.