I think money should be invested into investigating ways to retrofit the current urban sprawl neigborhoods to make them higher density.
Comment on Has any country actually _solved_ the housing crisis?
AA5B@lemmy.world 1 week agoMassachusetts has a regional transit system, and just used that to mandate transit oriented development for all towns and cities served. It requires they zone higher density housing “as of right” within half a mile of transit. I have high hopes for that, but it will take decades and we’re starting at such a high cost of living.
However we also have the problem of a stagnant population and very little room for new development. It’s infill and replacement housing so will be even slower
SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 1 week ago
AA5B@lemmy.world 1 week ago
The problem is everything with buildings is slow. Who can afford to replace functional buildings, and buildings remain useful for decades or more? There’s only so much you can do with infill. The only other option I can think of is to change zoning radically enough that it becomes profitable to bulldoze functional buildings. Of course that has additional environmental costs but over time should be fine
I’m personally not a fan of higher density buildings by themselves. That’s just a recipe for annoying people enough that you hope they demand better before they give up and move away. Higher density buildings needs to have some thought put into walkability, personal mobility, and transit
xapr@lemmy.sdf.org 1 week ago
Good to hear about any moves in the right direction anywhere.