One thing to note is that zoning has become tighter over time, as people work to institutionalize a fantasy of 'neighborhood character': More land in New York

One thing to note is that zoning has become tighter over time, as people work to institutionalize a fantasy of 'neighborhood character': More land in New York was downzoned than upzoned over the course of the Bloomberg administration from 2001-2013, which was considered a developer-friendly administration: https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/city-hall/story/2014/02/the-quiet-massive-rezoning-of-new-york-078398 https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/city-hall/story/201... 40% of existing buildings in Manhattan are bulkier than current zoning regulations would allow: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/05/19/upshot/forty-percent-of-manhattans-buildings-could-not-be-built-today.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/05/19/upshot/forty-... This pattern is broadly similar everywhere, where there may be older, denser buildings in a neighborhood but new ones cannot be built because the screws have been tightened over time, parking requirements have become more strict, etc. The opposite should be happening, you should be allowing more capacity as the current capacity is used up to maintain supply. --- There is also the fact that in a lot of areas that stopped building housing in the US, they pretty much reached out as far as you could get from city center by driving as a reasonable commute, so building ever more single family homes became significantly less desirable or possible. Now you hear people with crazy commutes like Stockton to San Francisco, nearly a 90 minute drive at 133km, but that is not really going to work out for most people.