3 ms·
Why is this fundamentally considered bad? If the majority of residents in a given area want to keep the zoning as-is, why do you (or I) have any right to force
by ed312 7y ago
Why is this fundamentally considered bad? If the majority of residents in a given area want to keep the zoning as-is, why do you (or I) have any right to force them to change? I personally don't mind living in multi-story apartment buildings but I don't get the widespread notion that a city of mostly SFH = morally bad. And frankly, if increasing density actually helped property values wouldn't you expect a place like NYC to be more affordable?
- jedberg 7y agoIt's as morally wrong as eating meat or paying minimum wage or running your water while you brush your teeth. ie. it's not really all that bad in the grand scheme of things, but it's something that we know causes harm, generally to a vulnerable population, so we should want to do something about it.
- orangecat 7y agoI don't get the widespread notion that a city of mostly SFH = morally bad Forget morality. A city with a large demand for housing that refuses to allow higher density is inevitably going to end up only being affordable to the very wealthy, with others forced to move, or out on the streets, or clinging to rent-controlled units with hostile landlords. If that's what you want, then by all means continue the current policies. And frankly, if increasing density actually helped property values wouldn't you expect a place like NYC to be more affordable? Manhattan holds a lot more people than SF, and there are reasonable cheaper options such as Queens and New Jersey.
- woah 7y agoWhat's weird is when people bemoan poor people getting forced out when it's happening due to the low-density policies they voted for.
- pcwalton 7y ago> If the majority of residents in a given area want to keep the zoning as-is, why do you (or I) have any right to force them to change? Because: (a) the "why should you be able to tell people what to do?" argument really runs the other way, as zoning is a way of telling property owners what they can and cannot do with their property; (b) rising home values cause renters to be forced out of their homes unnecessarily; (c) banning new housing in one city causes gentrification in other nearby cities (which is why for example East Palo Alto and Stockton came out in support of SB 50). > And frankly, if increasing density actually helped property values wouldn't you expect a place like NYC to be more affordable? Fortunately we have economists to study these things instead of drawing conclusions from single data points, and the economic consensus is that supply and demand does in fact apply to housing.