That's too simplistic; you can't pin the blame on a singular effect like that nor choose to disregard other factors to conveniently support some conclusion. It

That's too simplistic; you can't pin the blame on a singular effect like that nor choose to disregard other factors to conveniently support some conclusion. It is incidentally clear that low density zoning requirements are not the singular driving factor for sprawl simply because the sprawl occurs even in places without those rules (e.g. houston). Furthermore, effects like these have complex feedback loops. Zoning laws are entirely politically motivated - so the public's support is critical. You can be sure that public support would be affected if it became clear they led to crippling congestion that would not be solved by more road infrastructure; and conversely sprawl-encouraging zoning laws also encourage sprawl-enabling transport investments. Other factors to consider are parking availability (and rules concerning that), and probably more. The correlation between these effects means that you should be careful blaming just one factor, and certainly cannot conclude anything meaningful if you intentionally and artificially exclude related factors from your analysis.