Even low density housing through basic human presence distorts natural environments.
It's basically like this in terms of environmental impact:
No humans >>>>>>>>>>> a few humans >>> many humans >> enormous amounts of humans.
Is it passed on by birth right?
I guess that’s the city of liberty for you then.
I think there are valid reasons to want to control immigration, supply of housing isn’t one of them.
Then they make up stories about "neighbourhood character" and how it's gentrification that is driving up the prices.
Less green space isn't really what most cities need.
IMO, it's better to follow the NYC model. Have a few great parks and then dense building.
There are: instead of just letting every DAX or international megacorp to settle in Munich/Berlin or expand at will, force them to go to other cities instead.
Reducing parking requirements _may_ reduce quality of living, if public transportation isn't an option.
Japan solves the parking problem by requiring you to have an off-street parking space to own a car. Removing street parking increases the amount of land available for use, makes the city more walkable (and bikeable) and reduces car ownership.
The only real factor here is supply/demand. There are no good ways to control demand, so the only solution is to increase supply. Here are some ideas:
* Get rid of anti-dorm laws. There are laws in a lot of places that limit dorm style living by limiting the number of unrelated adults who can live in the same residence. However, this is the most economically efficient living situation.
* Change zoning. A lot of cities have most of their residential land zoned for single family only. Just change everything to multi-family. Remove requirements like having to conform to the character of the neighborhood, having to build parking spots per residence, having to have increased height based setbacks, needing to have a certain amount of land reserved for green space, etc.
* Remove construction limits. A lot of places have a building plan where they only approve so much building over a period of time. Just say yes. Change to a "shall issue" model, where the government needs an affirmative reason to deny a permit and has to do it within a certain time period for certain well-recognized reasons.
I'm not saying that all of these are good ideas. There are problems with all of them. And all of them will be unpopular.
But they should all increase the supply of housing. Which is the same thing as decreasing property values. Which is why they're all un-popular.