Dense housing is good for the environment. So why are San Francisco's climate activists so against it?
I took a 3-year, 30-city cross-country tour to study American cities. Here's what I learned along the way about our nation's demography, housing and culture.
Zoning reform is evolving from an economics issue into a social justice issue.
Home prices are growing higher and faster in Austin than other Texas cities. The cause is regulation.
The Bay Area would likely be denser - and a lot more urbanized.
LA's real housing booms took place decades ago.
Countries grow more prosperous as they urbanise - but not if the state gets in the way.
Portland's UGB limits development in the suburbs right around the city. This appears to be causing leapfrog sprawl throughout the larger metro.
Zoning violates federal law by having a "disparate impact" on low-income minorities.
Regulations in Toronto and Vancouver drive much of the same price inflation as in U.S. cities.
Two young developers have fought the regulations holding back a great American neighborhood.
We are directly contradicting our ideals when it comes to the environment, immigration and social equity.
The Emerald City's dense housing and transit network is starting to reflect New York, Boston, Philadelphia, DC, Chicago and San Francisco.
Why wouldn't Inland Empire housing be the same price, say, as in Phoenix?
Charlottesville is nice because of how it's been preserved. But this comes at a cost.
A bill rooted in the regulatory mindset might crack down on smaller housing types, also.
But a lack of zoning laws could prevent flooding in the future.
What used to be a housing lag has been redefined as a "boom".