3 ms·
In reality, TX cities are largely copying CA cities' worst policies in terms of preventing new housing construction; we need to fundamentally allow landowners t
by vwoolf 4y ago
In reality, TX cities are largely copying CA cities' worst policies in terms of preventing new housing construction; we need to fundamentally allow landowners to build as much housing on that land as any given land owner wishes to build.
But what about all the “affordable” destination cities? Restrictions there are, in most cases, just as bad. Duplexes and fourplexes are banned in 84 percent of residential neighborhoods in Charlotte. In Salt Lake City, minimum-parking mandates mean that apartments can’t be built without either towering garages or huge lots. In Austin, naysayers have successfully delayed a liberalizing zoning overhaul for a decade. And even in pro-growth states such as Georgia, California-style NIMBYism stands in the way of new housing in most suburbs.
To the extent that these cities were ever affordable, it was because they had undeveloped land on their periphery, where developers could build low-density residential subdivisions—just about the only thing that zoning doesn’t prohibit. But as Dallas is discovering, you eventually run out of vacant land within a reasonable commute of job centers. In Miami, local policy makers are even rolling back flexible-zoning rules in a brazen attempt to block new infill development.
- QuarterReptile 4y ago>we need to fundamentally allow landowners to build as much housing on that land as any given land owner wishes to build Strong Towns has a great line of reasoning against this. If you are in a place that has been severely suppressing supply, letting all the barriers down (officially) will result in towers next to SFH (because most people owning the inflated houses will know to still fight like hell, new laws be damned), which will reinforce development as a bad thing. Alternative recommendation: some appropriate increment of intensification allowed by right (always allowed to double number of units on a lot, increase number of stories by greater of 50% or two stories, or whatever could sound reasonable in your locale.) Developments meeting the threshold should get approval on a rapid basis. If you 'let' people build whatever, wherever, the political whiplash will shut it down before anything positive can result.