• Dozzi92@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can’t see the NYT article, it’s behind a paywall, or maybe just an email wall, I dunno, but I find it hard to believe that “most” of America restricts density. I live in NJ and density is almost a must these days, we’ve essentially developed everywhere. Even the towns with multimillion dollar homes are being forced to accept density.

    Personally, the solution needs to be tax land higher. You want your 2 acre property? You’re gonna pay for it. And that money will be used to help keep housing affordable.

    • Slimy_hog@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You live in one of the most dense parts of the country. Go West and you’ll see more single family homes and WAY WAY WAY less density

      • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        For sure, agreed. But there’s so much goddamn land and so few people. It’s not like the sprawling suburbia of NJ. I just don’t know that we can apply the same standard, or what the value would be for doing so. It makes sense along the northeast corridor. Land is valuable, and it’s a great place to live, and in an effort to keep things affordable we can apply density. Out west, in states that, when I look at a map, I need to really think about what state it is, I don’t know that the density is as necessary. And where it is necessary, cities exist. But I’ll admit, I’ve been to St. Louis once, but probably nowhere else within maybe 250 miles of it, so it’s a mystery to me.

        I’m not even sure what I’m talking about anymore, I’ve lost the point.

      • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I look to my own state because it’s what I know. A city like Jersey City has an R-1 zone for it’s least dense zone. At a minimum, you’re talking two family housing. Replacing old housing stock is a process, and so while the zoning has changed to allow for greater density, it’s just taking time.

        New York looks pretty good to me, and I think could be a model. I think even 65/35 would be a good mix of high and medium density to single and two family housing.

        In regards to all these cities, zoning may be in place for SFH, but how old is that zoning? Some places just don’t update their master plans. And like I said, I can’t really speak outside of NJ because the law is going to be different anywhere. I like to think it’s just a matter of time before things get modernized, but I don’t know.