With all due respect, this sounds like sophistry. The U.S. is generally very laissez faire in many things, but very much not so in the realm of land use. We have plenty of habitable land yet, but Euclidean zoning restricts what we’re allowed to do with it. In my city, which is typical in this regard, most of the land area is locked-in by law to single-family dwellings. We had a pretty contentious fight at the city council about easing the restrictions on the number of unrelated people who could live together in a house. (Typically, only family members are allowed.) It passed, which increased our available housing supply by a marginal amount.
Changes like this one, the Transit Overlay District zoning, and an apartment construction boom have not solved our housing woes, but we have had among the lowest growth in rental rates in the nation. And, not conincidentally, private equity has very little presence in our real estate market. Other cities that have allowed construction of new housing have similarly kept rental rates lower. Hence the states passing laws to eliminate single-family-only zones, and allowing the next increment of density by-right. Compare to California, the epicenter of the housing crisis, and the effect of very restrictive zoning, and Proposition 13.
The U.S. is generally very laissez faire in many things, but very much not so in the realm of land use.
That’s flatly false.
In my city, which is typical in this regard, most of the land area is locked-in by law to single-family dwellings
Laws written by developers which would change overnight if the largest firms told the city council to change them.
You have this backwards. These are not restrictions on big business. They’re rules written by landlords as part of a cartelization of real estate.
Houston is a great instance of this. We officially have “no zoning”, but so many HOAs and other contractual limits during deed transfer (the “single family” rule being a good example) that you’d never notice the difference.
In areas without extensive deed restrictions, AirBnB style investors have gobbled up available real estate for short term rentals. Efforts at the municipal level to curb this practice die in the same city council and courts that militantly defend the HOA in disputes.
With all due respect, this sounds like sophistry. The U.S. is generally very laissez faire in many things, but very much not so in the realm of land use. We have plenty of habitable land yet, but Euclidean zoning restricts what we’re allowed to do with it. In my city, which is typical in this regard, most of the land area is locked-in by law to single-family dwellings. We had a pretty contentious fight at the city council about easing the restrictions on the number of unrelated people who could live together in a house. (Typically, only family members are allowed.) It passed, which increased our available housing supply by a marginal amount.
Changes like this one, the Transit Overlay District zoning, and an apartment construction boom have not solved our housing woes, but we have had among the lowest growth in rental rates in the nation. And, not conincidentally, private equity has very little presence in our real estate market. Other cities that have allowed construction of new housing have similarly kept rental rates lower. Hence the states passing laws to eliminate single-family-only zones, and allowing the next increment of density by-right. Compare to California, the epicenter of the housing crisis, and the effect of very restrictive zoning, and Proposition 13.
That’s flatly false.
Laws written by developers which would change overnight if the largest firms told the city council to change them.
You have this backwards. These are not restrictions on big business. They’re rules written by landlords as part of a cartelization of real estate.
Houston is a great instance of this. We officially have “no zoning”, but so many HOAs and other contractual limits during deed transfer (the “single family” rule being a good example) that you’d never notice the difference.
In areas without extensive deed restrictions, AirBnB style investors have gobbled up available real estate for short term rentals. Efforts at the municipal level to curb this practice die in the same city council and courts that militantly defend the HOA in disputes.