4 ms·

The game theory of zoning dictates that it needs to be done at a higher-than-local level. Local control of zoning leads to weird incentives where multiple bord

The game theory of zoning dictates that it needs to be done at a higher-than-local level. Local control of zoning leads to weird incentives where multiple bordering municipalities in the same metro area both want the other ones to upzone, bring in more people and business (lifting up the whole metro area) while they themselves stay downzoned. The result of this game of chicken is that nobody upzones. CA and WA have had some recent wins with state-level zoning reform. It's unclear to me that it's needed at the Federal level -- state level seems like it should be enough in almost all cases.

LeanderK 3y ago
> The game theory of zoning dictates that it needs to be done at a higher-than-local level. This is also true in other countries. When a city grows everybody agrees that we need to expand the city and build new city districts. But it's always the other neighbouring municipalities who is better suited.
frumper 3y ago
I'm not sure why SF and LA should get to dictate how much parking is or isn't required in Copperopolis or Barstow. Parking spaces is not an issue in almost the entire United States. Dense places already have the tools to correct this problem themselves, and if they don't want to do it, then why would anyone force this on less populated locations.
- gamegoblin 3y ago
  This law will have no effect on rural places where parking is abundant. Yes, it prevents places like Copperopolis from passing laws that require more parking, but individual businesses will still build abundant parking because their customers want it and land is cheap. Dense places do not have the tools to correct the problem themselves due to the coordination problems mentioned in the parent comment. It's a pure game theory situation where nobody wants to act first. One could imagine a more targeted law that only applied to municipalities within X distance of a Y population density municipality, so you try to sharp-shoot the satellite suburbs that want the benefits of big-city density without the costs. But such targeted laws are also pretty hard to get right.
  - frumper 3y ago
    > Dense places do not have the tools to correct the problem themselves due to the coordination problems mentioned in the parent comment. It's a pure game theory situation where nobody wants to act first. Nobody wanting to act first doesn't mean they can't correct the problem. It means they don't. The federal government doesn't need to be involved in this.
sidewndr46 3y ago
The same thing plays out with regards to other things, strip clubs being a great example. Nearby jurisdictions don't allow strip clubs for example. But conveniently, the actual jurisdiction border looks like some sort of swiss cheese or jigsaw puzzle. Where the strip clubs right there beside the city and somehow zoned into another city, which allows them.
rcme 3y ago
> CA and WA have had some recent wins with state-level zoning reform. It's too early to call this a win. In my personal experience, giving decision making power to those without intimate knowledge of an area generally leads to poor results. There is a total mismatch incentives. Local residents are heavily invested in their town and want to keep it nice. Non-local officials, however, have no ties to the community and are willing to damage communities to meet some political objectives. Two personal examples: 1. The state government constructed a bridge over a small creek by my condo on the outskirts of NYC. They performed a traffic study saying this would have no impact on traffic, but locals knew this to be a lie and no one wanted this completed. When there's no traffic, this bridge saves you 5 minutes from driving to the next crossing. Now that this crossing has been completed, it's basically become an additional lane of the highway during rush hour. It's extremely dangerous to walk around as frustrated motorists speed through red lights. If you need to run an errand with your car in the morning, you need to leave at least an hour for a trip that used to take 15 minutes. 2. In the town I live now, there are certain roads maintained by the county. You can tell which ones are which because crossing the county roads as a pedestrian is extremely dangerous. Multiple kids have been hit by cars this year. The county doesn't care and the town is powerless to change the county roads. I really believe that it's important that locals have the power to influence their environment that impacts their day-to-day life. Also, I hate how every issue in the U.S. is framed in a way that conveniently leaves out the capitalist class. Like yea, our housing issues are definitely caused by those damn NIMBYs who like their homes, not the investor class who owns 50 million housing units and are heavily subsidized by the federal government.

LeanderK 3y ago

> The game theory of zoning dictates that it needs to be done at a higher-than-local level. This is also true in other countries. When a city grows everybody agrees that we need to expand the city and build new city districts. But it's always the other neighbouring municipalities who is better suited.

frumper 3y ago

I'm not sure why SF and LA should get to dictate how much parking is or isn't required in Copperopolis or Barstow. Parking spaces is not an issue in almost the entire United States. Dense places already have the tools to correct this problem themselves, and if they don't want to do it, then why would anyone force this on less populated locations.

gamegoblin 3y ago
This law will have no effect on rural places where parking is abundant. Yes, it prevents places like Copperopolis from passing laws that require more parking, but individual businesses will still build abundant parking because their customers want it and land is cheap. Dense places do not have the tools to correct the problem themselves due to the coordination problems mentioned in the parent comment. It's a pure game theory situation where nobody wants to act first. One could imagine a more targeted law that only applied to municipalities within X distance of a Y population density municipality, so you try to sharp-shoot the satellite suburbs that want the benefits of big-city density without the costs. But such targeted laws are also pretty hard to get right.
- frumper 3y ago
  > Dense places do not have the tools to correct the problem themselves due to the coordination problems mentioned in the parent comment. It's a pure game theory situation where nobody wants to act first. Nobody wanting to act first doesn't mean they can't correct the problem. It means they don't. The federal government doesn't need to be involved in this.

sidewndr46 3y ago

The same thing plays out with regards to other things, strip clubs being a great example. Nearby jurisdictions don't allow strip clubs for example. But conveniently, the actual jurisdiction border looks like some sort of swiss cheese or jigsaw puzzle. Where the strip clubs right there beside the city and somehow zoned into another city, which allows them.

rcme 3y ago

> CA and WA have had some recent wins with state-level zoning reform. It's too early to call this a win. In my personal experience, giving decision making power to those without intimate knowledge of an area generally leads to poor results. There is a total mismatch incentives. Local residents are heavily invested in their town and want to keep it nice. Non-local officials, however, have no ties to the community and are willing to damage communities to meet some political objectives. Two personal examples: 1. The state government constructed a bridge over a small creek by my condo on the outskirts of NYC. They performed a traffic study saying this would have no impact on traffic, but locals knew this to be a lie and no one wanted this completed. When there's no traffic, this bridge saves you 5 minutes from driving to the next crossing. Now that this crossing has been completed, it's basically become an additional lane of the highway during rush hour. It's extremely dangerous to walk around as frustrated motorists speed through red lights. If you need to run an errand with your car in the morning, you need to leave at least an hour for a trip that used to take 15 minutes. 2. In the town I live now, there are certain roads maintained by the county. You can tell which ones are which because crossing the county roads as a pedestrian is extremely dangerous. Multiple kids have been hit by cars this year. The county doesn't care and the town is powerless to change the county roads. I really believe that it's important that locals have the power to influence their environment that impacts their day-to-day life. Also, I hate how every issue in the U.S. is framed in a way that conveniently leaves out the capitalist class. Like yea, our housing issues are definitely caused by those damn NIMBYs who like their homes, not the investor class who owns 50 million housing units and are heavily subsidized by the federal government.