Conversation
![David Watson 🥑](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="96" height="96"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
Post your reply
One of the main criticisms of YIMBY efforts as a means to address housing affordability is to cite a paper from Yonah Freemark and others that finds small effects of housing regulation reforms on average.
This criticism misses the mark. The study doesn’t show zoning reform doesn’t work, it shows that it is hard on average. You can find many examples of reforms that didn’t move the needle because zoning is a tangled regulatory mess.
For example, you can change zoning codes to allow apartments, but then find them still blocked by height limits, parking mandates, building setback requirements, side yard requirements, architectural review, historic commissions, etc.
This complexity is why local reform is tough, and even harder for federal efforts to incentivize reform. A municipality can always remove some constraints, receive a grant for “reform”, but still have other blocks to development in place. Or a bureaucracy that remains in power
The complexity and bureaucracy is a key motivation for the design of Density Zones: instead of asking for marginal changes that can be insufficient or undermined, ask instead for wholesale implementation of new zoning and building codes.
But won’t this be blocked by public opposition currently getting in the way of marginal reforms? This is where the other part of Density Zones come in: geographically targeted. I believe this will help overcome some of the NIMBY opposition.
NIMBYism is not a monolith that opposes building equally everywhere. As argues in his book, much of NIMBYism is driven by a vocal minority who oppose building IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS, and you can really buy off their opposition. He writes:
Density Zones would be implemented by design (and even by name, to make it super clear) in specific areas only. The vocal minority would be assuaged in some places.
By all means, we should continue to fight for broad reforms that target the most exclusionary neighborhoods. But we should not let areas where there is consensus for more building be held hostage by that very tough fight. Thats what Density Zones do.
Part of how I would put this, is do you think the Senakw development was a good thing?
Or should it have been blocked until broad housing reforms in Vancouver were implemented? I think it was good, and we should have more like that. That’s what Density Zones would do.
There are also macro spillovers of this policy. For example, a consistent national zoning code would help increase regional and national competitiveness in construction, help spread best practices, and more.
Don't get hung up on details yet. Think of Density Zones as a framework for reform: deep zoning reforms, highly geographically targeted, paired with incentives for the local government that are paid only when specific building targets are hit.
Beyond that framework, there is much to be done. How should density targets be set? How do you prevent gaming? Is the building code portion doable? There is much for housing reform world to work on here, I’d love the input.
There is a lot more to unpack about this. I am hopeful that there is enough interest in this to merit continued work. You can read our proposal here. agglomerations.substack.com/p/how-the-next
, if half the houses burn, prices gonna tank hard. But yeah, we need that by-right construction to keep things chill
A movement is growing to change the way we elect our president. That’s why Hillsdale College is conducting a National Survey on Presidential Selection.
Complete this survey to help us more clearly understand the views of mainstream Americans concerning this issue.
Rate proposed Community Notes
It was only a matter of time before urbanist yimbyism concerned about exclusionary zoning would just propose zoning that excluded certain home types not congruent with urbanism.
I would love to see a proposal that offered both carrots and sticks. Can you tax away all gains on the sale of a house if the local zoning is too strict? From the local community the only acceptable form of new housing is no new housing, at least based on my anecdotal experience.
As someone who lives in the heart of a NIMBY stronghold (NYC) suburbs. I don’t think carrots are going to move the needle, or you will see most density being placed far away from the ideal place (most townhouses are only able to be built car ride from public transit).
Yes, this is the way. Use the deep pockets of the federal government to incentivize (but not force) good behavior zoning reform at the local level.
Discover more
Sourced from across X
"The share of chips manufactured at TSMC’s facility in Phoenix that are usable is about 4 percentage points higher than comparable facilities in Taiwan..."
Quote
Bloomberg
@business
TSMC has achieved early production yields at its first plant in Arizona that surpass similar factories in Taiwan, a significant breakthrough for a US expansion project initially dogged by delays and worker strife trib.al/c6XdKvH
