Misconceptions About Single-Family Zoning Laws and High-Density Housing in the US
Recent discussions and articles have spread many misconceptions regarding single-family zoning laws and the potential for high-density housing replacing single-family neighborhoods, predominantly in California and the United States. Many statements are based on specious arguments and incomplete information, leading to a general misunderstanding of the true implications of these zoning laws. This article aims to clarify these misunderstandings and provide a factual overview of the situation.
Where Did You Get Such an Incredulous Notion?
The notion that all single-family home residential neighborhoods in California and the United States will be demolished and replaced with high-density housing due to new upzoning laws is a misconception. If that were the case, where would Americans who live on farms be able to live, considering that a significant portion of their food supply relies on farm-based residences? It is critical to examine the facts and dispel such baseless speculations.
The Facts About Single-Family Zoning
“Single-family zoning” refers to a residential area where only one housing unit can be built on a given parcel of land. This zoning practice is prevalent across the United States, with two-thirds of all residences in California being single-family homes. Moreover, according to research by UC Berkeley, as much as three-quarters of the developable land in the state is zoned for single-family housing. A recent analysis by the Terner Center for Housing at UC Berkeley projects that the new upzoning laws would result in 714,000 new units being built statewide over the coming years, representing just 5.4% of the state’s 7.5 million single-family lots. These new developments are likely to have a higher-than-average concentration in Los Angeles.
Property owners will have the say in whether to subdivide and build duplexes or other housing units. Several factors will influence their decision, including whether they are willing to live in one of the units for at least three years. If facts matter, it is essential to read the bills signed to boost California's housing supply. These laws are focused on increasing the total number of housing units and improving housing affordability, not on demolishing existing single-family neighborhoods.
Why Split California and the Rest of America?
The question of why single-family zoning is being abolished is often used to paint California as an outlier. However, to the extent that single-family zoning is abolished, it would only mean that other kinds of housing are allowed in an area than just single-family residences. Eliminating such zoning has nothing to do with eminent domain or the government demolishing anything. Both California and other states are considering similar changes to address the pressing need for more housing options, particularly in densely populated urban areas.
“Why split California and the rest of America? Is California doing things differently than the rest of America? If so, why?”
Demolition of Neighborhoods: A Utopian Dream?
The idea that neighborhoods will be demolished and replaced with entirely new developments is a utopian and unrealistic concept. The progress of urban planning and housing policy is more nuanced and aims to enhance the livability and diversity of communities. For example, neighborhoods in San Francisco, which would seem to be ideal candidates for such developments, have seriously resisted efforts at "renewal." This resistance highlights the importance of community input and local context in shaping housing policies.
“Nope. To the extent single-family zoning is abolished, it would simply mean that other kinds of housing would be allowed to be built in an area than just single-family residences. Eliminating such zoning has nothing to do with eminent domain or the government demolishing anything.”
Conclusion
The debate around single-family zoning and high-density housing is complex and multifaceted. While there is a concerted effort to increase housing supply and diversity, it is crucial to engage in evidence-based discussions and to respect the local context and community preferences. The notion of wholesale demolition and replacement of entire neighborhoods is highly unlikely and not supported by the evidence. Instead, the focus should be on finding sustainable solutions that accommodate growing populations while preserving the character and quality of life in existing communities.