Famous for its lack of good restaurants.
Sometimes governments forget who works for who.
That’s the kind of thing you get when you have an organization like the American Planning Association “guiding” local governments on what they need. APA thinks they know what the perfect ‘community’ is, and that all it takes is the right rules and regulations to get it.
They’ve pushed those kinds of regulations in communities all over the country, whether they make sense or not. The next level, after they get you to regulate how places look, is to regulate land use so restrictively that they can control what you see too...
When it comes right down to it, it’s all about letting them control you.
Property maintenance codes are pretty standard fare. The scope of them varies. Many jurisdictions will put a lien on properties against fines levied for violations. To me a better thing would be to allow community service programs to partcipate in maintaining properties for those residents who are too frail to do so on their own or who can not afford the expense.
The city’s compliance with ADA is a separate issue from their building a hiking trail. The funding source of the hiking trail is not mentioned in the article. Did they receive any grant money (public or private). Were the easements donated to the city? Had thye committed any bonds to the project? Without that information is kind of hard to say whether the city is just crying poor mouth about ADA compliance. Remember the trail if operated by the city for the public will also have to meet ADA requirements for such uses.
New residents will not be attracted to areas with run down, poorly maintained housing stock. At least not the sort of residents you would like.