5 ms·
California basically did this[1]. Sadly though the desirable coastal areas are literally full and all spoken for and even without any real zoning anymore there’
by User23 3y ago
California basically did this[1]. Sadly though the desirable coastal areas are literally full and all spoken for and even without any real zoning anymore there’s nowhere to actually build. So you’re gonna need to eminent domain some Malibu mansions to make room for the non stop line of 1+5s from LA to SF.
It’s also interesting to me how many people propose increasing supply when there is nowhere to build, but can’t even think about reducing demand, say by reducing the all time record in migration. But that’s literally crimethink.
Sure the USA has a ton of empty space. But guess what, that’s because most people don’t want to live in those places. And the places where people do want to live like waterfront cities are geographically full.
[1] https://www.latimes.com/homeless-housing/story/2021-09-17/what-just-happened-with-single-family-zoning-in-california https://www.latimes.com/homeless-housing/story/2021-09-17/wh...
- bombcar 3y agoCalifornia can develop all the canyons that keep catching on fire. Until it’s Kolowoon Walled City from Tijuana to Oregon it’s not enough!
- AlotOfReading 3y agoAs someone who also lives in California, can you point out the parts of the state where there's nowhere left to build? It certainly isn't any of the places I've lived (Beverly hills, SF, East Bay), each of which has seen significant commercial redevelopment in my lifetime. None of them are dense by global standards either. SF only has 25% the population density of Paris, for example.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- pmoriarty 3y agoJust build up. Zoning laws are what prevent that. Those need to be changed.