3 ms·
Yet some cities are making progress on exactly that issue. I haven't done the statistics on it, but I'll bet cities full of people who want zoning reform are m
by llamaimperative 2y ago
Yet some cities are making progress on exactly that issue.
I haven't done the statistics on it, but I'll bet cities full of people who want zoning reform are more likely to reform than cities full of people who do not want it.
- Schiendelman 2y agoNo city has implemented anything like zoning reform. There are a handful of cities which, to great fanfare, have made tiny changes. Minneapolis has made the most impact, but it's hard to rule out correlation with falling demand for that city.
- llamaimperative 2y agoRaleigh doubled its zoned density overnight.
- Schiendelman 2y agoThey did not. They allowed duplexes and townhouses in some places that were limited to single houses (https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/wake-county/article252499018.html https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/wake-county...). This change ultimately allowed something like 10% more units in the city on a 100 year horizon. This is what I'm calling out - these changes sound big but they are nearly meaningless. Cities need periods of explosive growth to remain affordable (see Jane Jacobs, 1961 and 1970).
- llamaimperative 2y agoPlease cite each of those 10% and 100 year numbers. You can read the text change. It allows duplexes and ~doubled the allowed density on almost every residential zoning type.
- Schiendelman 2y agoWhat makes you think that the changes made will increase relative to baseline by more than 10% increase in housing stock over 100 years?
- llamaimperative 2y agoLol the onus is not on me to rebut what appear to be numbers made up from whole cloth.
- Schiendelman 2y agoKind of, but you're implying Raleigh's changes will have more impact than that. What makes you think so?
- llamaimperative 2y agoI said "Raleigh doubled its zoned density overnight." You said "No they did not" and "No city has implemented anything like zoning reform." Both of these are false. You can refer to the text changes. They doubled the zoned density in nearly every residential zoning type in the city. It is a huge change, though I suppose you can claim that's not "reform" if you want. It is sufficiently reformative for my purposes of increasing urban density over time. Changes will take time to kick in, and obviously they should take time to kick in because simply clicking a button and doubling actual built density would crater the economy. It makes no sense. The zoning change removes an artificial restriction on the natural supply/demand curve, so now supply can grow as-needed in the forms desired.
- Schiendelman 2y agoI don't think it really does to the supply/demand curve what you think it does. In general, when new construction occurs, it's taking low density and replacing it with more like 10X density. A very tiny amount of land gets developed at once, so you need each new development opportunity to generate as much supply as possible. What this did was make people think gosh, that means a lot of housing! But in actuality, very few of these ever get built. Only very old housing stock ever makes sense to replace with only a doubling. I appreciate what you're trying to say, but what I said was actually true. This won't have much impact. I can give you drips and drabs of information this way to help you understand how development works, but I can't give you an entire primer, unless you'd like to get on the Zoom and talk about it for a couple hours.