>Minimum setbacks, yard size requirements, etc. -- these are all things that people want and continue to pay for If these are what people want, this regulation

>Minimum setbacks, yard size requirements, etc. -- these are all things that people want and continue to pay for If these are what people want, this regulation wouldn't be required, now would it? Anyone who built anything else would go bankrupt. Unfortunately for the theory that this is what people want, cities are still full of people and have the most expensive real estate. Walkable areas generally command a premium over car only areas. Locations near transit tend to be more expensive than those not near transit. Funny how in places where we stop mandating sprawl, the sprawl goes away. Compare Arlington, VA in the 1970s vs. 2010s; it had all of these regulations near the Metro lines before it was built (and kept them not near Metro) but relaxed them after the Metro was built. It's night and day. I can point to dozens of places where once these rules go away, the sprawl goes away.