I'm glad to see that one of the neighboring towns of Leonia NJ (the town that attempted to restrict the use of public roads to residents only from 6-10AM and 5-9PM) is suing the town over the constitutionality of the restrictions:
The article doesn't address this, but one way to renew older industrial cities would be to connect these cities to more vibrant cities through better public transportation.
For instance, both Lowell and Worcester in MA are each less than 50 miles from Boston, when measuring city center to city center. Both cities fell on hard times in the 20th century, but reliable rail with 20-30 minute travel times is technical feasible and would do wonders for both cites, not to mention help relieve the severe housing shortage around Boston.
Part(s) of problem is A. access to employees with the right skill sets and B. their respective commutes and desire to live closer to the city.
So, you could choose to locate a company in Worcester (or even closer in, say, Framingham), but many of the 20/30 somethings will have a tough time getting to these locations and these towns themselves don't have people with the necessary skill sets.
It's criminal the train from Boston to Worcester is slower today than it was in 1950. But that's another topic.
Not necessarily bluGill. If new housing is built across most of the city or state, there could well be less thru-traffic from the suburbs into the city.
I do agree with you though that if new housing is only built in a small number of areas, those areas could very well see more traffic. A goal of SB-827 was to increase housing across the entire state, particularly near areas well served by mass transit, in the hope it would result in less people commuting by car.