You seem to frame it as an exclusivity problem - they're trying to exclude people from affordable housing...
while the people who live there look at it as preserving what makes it livable
neither are right or wrong on their own, but surely build at all cost isn't a solution to mountain town charm
>while the people who live there look at it as preserving what makes it livable
And they're free to buy up all the land and choose what they want to do with it
This is objectively not true in urban areas like San Francisco or New York City
I used to commute to Manhattan a few times a month.
Even in a modern sprawl shitshow like the DC or Boston Metro area, it’s way cheaper and easier to get housing than many California locales.
End of the day, there’s just a shit ton of money combined with insane policy decisions in California. It’s a inspiring, puzzling and disturbing place, all at the same time.
Complete zoning and policy failure is a uniquely California problem. Nobody has a structural, and likely unconstitutional inequity in taxation that California does. Some rando Bay Area suburb being more expensive than Manhattan is not the same problem.