Affordable housing ≠ housing affordability

Cities become affordable when lots of new housing is built, not when a larger percentage of a small stock of new housing is made "affordable" by mandate.

Matthew Boonstra, Homes under construction, Edmonton, 2020. CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons.

Why Building a Lot of 'Affordable' Housing Is Bad News for Affordability | Reason | Christian Britschgi:

January 7, 2025 - "On New Year's Eve, the Boston city government issued a press release touting the good work of its newly reorganized Planning Department at approving new development. The city reports that 3,575 net residential units were approved in 2024, of which a little over a third were 'income-restricted.' That top-line number is not necessarily anything to brag about....  Despite having some of the highest home prices and rents in the country, Boston is permitting fewer homes than less-expensive peer cities with equivalent populations.... 

"Even more concerning than Boston not permitting a lot of new homes is how many of the homes it is permitting are 'income-restricted.' Those are units (often also just called 'affordable,' 'below-market," or 'deed-restricted' units) that are reserved for lower-income residents and where rents are capped at steeply discounted below-market rates. Despite the city's celebratory touting of that figure, such a high share of new housing being income-restricted housing is very bad news.

"That data point suggests that not only is Boston not building a lot of housing, but that it's vastly under-building what the market demands. It says most of the projects getting approved in Boston are either dependent on public subsidies or command such high rents that they can bear the cost of the city's punishing affordable housing mandates. Understanding exactly why cities don't become affordable by raising the 'affordable" share of the tiny amount of housing that they do build is crucial for getting housing policy right.... 

"In a free market without subsidies and price controls, there wouldn't be such a thing as 'income-restricted" units. All housing would be rented or sold at market rates for a profit (save for whatever housing is provided by charitable nonprofits and religious groups). New housing would be pricey under such a system. But without zoning or other artificial caps on production, housing would still generally be affordable thanks to filtering. 

"Filtering is the process by which high-income people move into pricey, newly built units, lowering demand (and prices) for the older units they leave behind. Those units are then snapped up by lower-income people, who themselves leave behind an older, less-expensive unit to be taken by even lower-income people. Studies that follow the filtering process down the income ladder find that the addition of new market-rate units kicks off a chain of moves that ends up leaving more units available in the most affordable neighborhoods.

"Boston, of course, does not have a free market in housing.... One measure of regulatory burden finds Boston has the strictest land use rules in the country. A consequence of such strict regulations is that the natural market filtering process is thrown in reverse.... Units become more expensive over time, not less. Lower-income people economize by moving into older, worse housing.... People at the bottom rung of the income ladder either move out of town or move onto the street.... When filtering has broken down in a city, the obvious move for policymakers is to get rid of the zoning rules, permitting requirements, impact fees, taxes, mandates, and more that stymie new housing production. Instead, cities like Boston have decided to fix the ill consequences of overregulation with more regulation.... 

"The voluminous research on inclusionary zoning policies finds that they're an effective tax on new housing that lowers housing production and raises housing prices. For-profit builders need to make a higher rate of return on their market-rate units in order to make up for the tax imposed by 'income-restricted' units. If the returns on market-rate units in a project don't cover the costs of the inclusionary zoning tax, then that project just doesn't get proposed at all. That means that in Boston, fewer units overall get built and the market-rate units that do make sense to build are incredibly expensive.... Housing becomes affordable when a lot of it is built, not when capital-A 'affordable housing' makes up a larger slice of a tiny new housing pie."

Read more: https://reason.com/2025/01/07/why-building-a-lot-of-affordable-housing-is-bad-news-for-affordability/

Sunday cartoon - Sunny ways

To help alleviate the vibecession, GDPA presents our first attempt at a political cartoon, with the help of X's AI, Grok. I hope you enjoy. 

Robust property rights could help build housing

Sign in the window of a boutique in the North End neighbourhood of Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Photo by A Disappearing Act, February 27, 2024, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.

Strengthening Property Rights Part of the Answer to Canada’s Housing Crunch | Epoch Times | Joseph Quesnel, Frontier Centre for Public Policy:

August 1, 2023 - "Housing is a big issue for Canadians.... A poll from Ipsos in the spring [of 2023] showed that about 63 out of every 100 Canadians who don’t own a house have given up on ever getting one. Almost seven out of 10 said that only rich people can afford to own homes.... Canadians may not understand how property rights — or, in many cases, the lack thereof — play a part in the housing shortage, and how robust property rights can help alleviate the problem.

"The recently released Canadian Property Rights Index from the Frontier Centre for Public Policy identified how local laws that control how people can use their land are a major cause for concern across Canada. These laws, known as 'regulatory takings,' can be very limiting. Regulatory or 'constructive' takings refer to local land use or zoning laws that limit how individuals may use their land. Many jurisdictions, provinces, and municipalities in Canada have such laws, with the most restrictive coming from the provinces. As a result, this land can’t be used for building houses.

"Excluding land from development and urban growth puts upward pressure on housing prices. There is a clear connection between urban containment policies and housing affordability. 'Urban containment' is a name for policies that limit the spread of cities and clearly separate city and country land. Wendell Cox, author of the Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey, has documented how these policies affect housing affordability in all cities around the world.... Policies that limit or ban the development of unused land push up the cost of land and housing. This is certainly not confined to Canada.... 

"British Columbia and Ontario offer two case studies.

• Since the 1970s, B.C. has maintained an Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) as a land use exclusion zone. Designed to protect valuable agricultural land and protect the public from food insecurity, the exclusion zone has created problems for municipalities seeking to grow to accommodate growing populations.... Even though the ALR only covers about five percent of B.C.’s total land, its rules have blocked the housing and development needs of communities.
• In the case of Ontario’s Greenbelt, cynical critics are more often focused on who wants to develop the land than the fact that municipalities are being squeezed and feel that certain lands need to be excluded from the Greenbelt if they are to meet the housing and development needs of their communities.

"Experience with urban containment policies in the United States might serve as an inspiration. Facing housing affordability issues, many states have seen pushback against such policies. States such as Colorado, with more robust democratic systems that allow for referenda and citizen initiatives, rejected overly restrictive urban containment policies and favoured the property rights of land users. Canadians across all provinces and territories should also push back, stop demonizing land developers, and begin to recognize their property rights so we can solve our housing problems."

Read more: https://www.theepochtimes.com/opinion/strengthening-property-rights-part-of-the-answer-to-canadas-housing-crunch-5434635?ea_src=ca-frontpage&ea_med=top-news-opinion-undefined-title-1

Canadian Property Rights Index 2023: https://fcpp.org/2023/07/17/canadian-property-rights-index-2023/

Redacted RCMP report warns of civil unrest

A secret RCMP report is warning the federal government that Canada may descend into civil unrest once citizens realize the bleakness of their economic situation.

Secret RCMP report warns Canadians may revolt once they realize how broke they are | National Post | Tristin Hopper:

March 20, 2024 - "A secret RCMP report is warning the federal government that Canada may descend into civil unrest once citizens realize the hopelessness of their economic situation. 'The coming period of recession will … accelerate the decline in living standards that the younger generations have already witnessed compared to earlier generations,' reads the report, entitled Whole-of-Government Five-Year Trends for Canada. 'For example, many Canadians under 35 are unlikely ever to be able to buy a place to live,' it adds.

"The report, labelled secret, is intended as a piece of 'special operational information' to be distributed only within the RCMP and among 'decision-makers' in the federal government. A heavily redacted version was made public as a result of an access to information request filed by Matt Malone, an assistant professor of law at British Columbia’s Thompson Rivers University, and an expert in government secrecy....

"[T]he report authors warn that whatever Canada’s current situation, it 'will probably deteriorate further in the next five years.' In addition to worsening living standards, the RCMP also warns of a future increasingly defined by unpredictable weather and seasonal catastrophes, such as wildfires and flooding. Most notably, report authors warn of Canada facing 'increasing pressure to cede Arctic territory.'

"Another major theme of the report is that Canadians are set to become increasingly disillusioned with their government.... 'Law enforcement should expect continuing social and political polarization fueled by misinformation campaigns and an increasing mistrust for all democratic institutions,' reads one of the report’s 'overarching considerations.'

"Ironically, among the report’s more heavily redacted sections is one carrying the subtitle 'erosion of trust.' 'The past seven years have seen marked social and political polarization in the Western world' reads a partial first sentence, with the entire rest of the section deleted by government censors.

"The censor’s pen also deleted most of a section warning about 'paranoid populism.' 'Capitalizing on the rise of political polarization and conspiracy theories have been populists willing to tailor their messages to appeal to extremist movements,' reads the section’s one non-redacted sentence.

"In terms of declining living standards and inaccessible home ownership, the RCMP’s warnings are indeed in line with available statistics. Canadian productivity — measured in terms of GDP per capita — has been trending downwards since at least the 1980s. But this has accelerated dramatically in recent years.... Meanwhile, housing affordability has reached 'worst-ever' levels in most of Canada’s major markets, according to a December analysis by RBC. On average, even condos are now so unaffordable that only 44.5 per cent of Canadian households had sufficient income to buy one at current prices. As for single-family homes, only the richest 25 per cent of Canadian households had any hope of obtaining one.

"'Economic forecasts for the next five years and beyond are bleak,' reads the RCMP’s assessment of the rest of the decade."

Read more: https://nationalpost.com/opinion/secret-rcmp-report-warns-canadians-may-revolt-once-they-realize-how-broke-they-are

Read redacted report: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24467543/rcmp-5-year-trends-report.pdf

RCMP Warn of an ANGRIER Canada in New Report | The Elev8 Podcast | March 20, 2024: 

Rental industry a casualty of pandemic policy

The COVID-19 Pandemic Permanently Damaged Property Rights | Reason - Steven Greenhuit:

March 24, 2023 - "Government officials aren't wiser than the rest of us, so when they tried to deal with a serious public health problem, they did so in a forceful, ineloquent, and unreasonable manner.... In [a] column last year summarizing lessons from COVID-19, I concluded that it left us as a 'nation of rulers, not laws.' American governors — and California Gov. Gavin Newsom in particular — quickly and eagerly used their broad emergency powers to begin issuing edicts. Given the extent of the public-health threat, some of the more modest and temporary ones were understandable, but they bypassed the normal legislative process in cynical and expansive ways.

"One Republican lawmaker published a 138-page document detailing the 400 laws that Newsom unilaterally imposed or changed — many of them that only tangentially had anything to do with protecting public health. In particular, officials used the crisis to impose policies they already supported but couldn't get through the normal legislative process.

"The worst example involved anti-eviction orders that have literally destroyed our property rights. Virtually all mom-and-pop landlords depend on the rental income. With one fell swoop, governors (and the federal Centers for Disease Control) declared that tenants no longer had to pay their full rent if they faced a pandemic-related hardship. Sure, landlords could potentially collect rent in the future in civil court, but good luck with that.

"In making it virtually impossible to evict non-paying tenants, policymakers imposed the full cost of their public-health plans on individual property owners, who could no longer count on getting a return on their investment. Often, property owners have mortgages — and they always have tax and insurance bills. When a heating system or roof leaks, they're still required (ethically and legally) to make repairs. But they no longer could count on receiving rent....

"I thought that most people—even renters who have had less-than-stellar rental experiences—might understand that if the government deprives owners of their supposed state constitutional right to a fair return on their investment, fewer people will go into the business and even fewer will upgrade their properties. That helps no one. The result is obvious: fewer available rentals and fewer rentals in tip-top condition. Investing in rental property has always been a prime means for middle-class people to build wealth. My grandfather was an immigrant paperhanger (remember wallpaper?) who invested in Philadelphia row houses decades ago. Now, I talk to many people who won't dare buy a rental house out of the legitimate fear that the government can suspend rent payments at will.

"Tenants often outnumber owners, especially in larger cities such as Los Angeles.... Certainly, many cities (San Francisco, Santa Monica, New York) embraced strict rent control long before the pandemic was a thing. They largely destroyed their housing markets of course, as renters stayed put in under-market units while investors high-tailed it elsewhere. But COVID added a new level of uncertainty. Look at how Los Angeles continually extended its anti-eviction provisions.

"Any time I hear of a bad flu season or other health scare, I fully expect Newsom and others to return to their COVID-19 anti-eviction playbook.... [W]e no longer have property rights when officials can eliminate them by executive order, legislation, or regulatory fiat. That is COVID's lasting legacy — and the lasting result will not be pretty."

Read more: https://reason.com/2023/03/24/the-covid-19-pandemic-permanently-damaged-property-rights/

"How We Lose Our Property Rights in Crisis." Free the People, April 3, 2020:

U.S federal judge strikes down CDC eviction ban

 Federal Judge Strikes Down Moratorium on Evicting Renters | New York Times - Glenn Thrush:

May 5, 2021 - "A federal judge on Wednesday struck down the nationwide moratorium on evictions imposed by the Trump administration last year and extended by President Biden until June 30.... The decision, by Judge Dabney Friedrich of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, is the most significant federal ruling on the moratorium yet, and follows three similar federal court decisions.

"The Justice Department immediately filed an appeal, and requested an emergency stay on the order pending a decision by the higher court. Late Wednesday night, Judge Friedrich agreed to put her ruling on hold until May 12 ... while making clear that the move was not a reflection of the 'merits' of the government’s request. It remains unclear how wide an impact the decision will have on renters. It does not necessarily bind state housing court judges, who rule on eviction orders, and two other federal courts have upheld the moratorium, adding to the confusion about its fate....

"The moratorium was enacted under the Public Health Service Act of 1944, which gives the federal government the power to impose quarantines and other measures to deal with health emergencies. In a 20-page decision, Judge Friedrich, who was appointed by President Donald J. Trump, ruled that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had exceeded its authority under that law when it carried out Mr. Trump’s order last summer to impose the moratorium.

"'The question for the court is a narrow one: Does the Public Health Service Act grant the C.D.C. the legal authority to impose a nationwide eviction moratorium?' wrote Judge Friedrich. 'It does not.'

"The case was brought in November by the Alabama Association of Realtors and a group of real estate agents in Georgia who claimed the moratorium shifted the burden for rent payments from the tenants to landlords at a time when many owners have been struggling to meet their own expenses. The moratorium has had a substantial effect. Despite the sharp economic downturn created by the pandemic, eviction filings declined 65 percent in 2020 over the usual annual rate, according to an analysis of court data by the nonprofit group Eviction Lab.

"Housing analysts warned that Wednesday’s ruling could embolden more landlords to begin eviction proceedings against tenants before the federal government can disburse $45 billion in emergency housing assistance appropriated by Congress.... Four months after Congress approved its first tens of billions of dollars in emergency rental aid, only a small portion has reached landlords and tenants, and in many places it is impossible even to file an application....  "Owners of residential apartment buildings have long argued that the moratorium is based on legally shaky ground, and questioned the constitutionality of tethering a major intervention in the nation’s housing market to a federal statute intended to stop the transmission of disease....

"If the moratorium has been polarizing in the courts, it was one of the few pandemic policies that united Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump. The CARES Act, passed in March 2020 with Mr. Trump’s support, included a 120-day moratorium on evictions from rental properties participating in federal assistance programs or underwritten by federal loans. On Aug. 8, 2020, Mr. Trump extended and broadened the moratorium through an executive order, leading to the C.D.C.’s action. Shortly after taking office, Mr. Biden extended the moratorium.... On Wednesday, Jen Psaki, Mr. Biden’s spokeswoman, told reporters the administration would fight to uphold the moratorium....

"Most states have enacted their own eviction freezes beyond the action taken by Washington. On Monday, New York State lawmakers passed legislation that would extend a statewide moratorium on residential and commercial evictions through Aug. 31."

Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/05/us/politics/eviction-moratorium-biden.html

Green New Deal could cost over $90 Trillion

Study: Green New Deal Could Cost More Than $90 Trillion – Reason.com - Joe Seyton:

February 25, 2019 - "The Green New Deal — a brainchild of progressive Democrats... — has been controversial since it was released....  How much would it cost? At least $50 trillion and possibly in excess of $90 trillion, according to a report released ... by the American Action Forum (AAF).

"The AAF, a center-right think tank that focuses on economic issues, projected costs for six aspects of the Green New Deal: reworking the electricity grid in an environmentally friendly manner, revamping the nation's transportation network to reduce transmissions, and its guarantees of well-paying jobs, universal health care, affordable housing, and food security for each person in the U.S.

"One of the Green New Deal's goals is to meet '100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources' in the next 10 years. Achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions in this area would cost at least $5.4 trillion by 2029, the AAF says — not including another $387 billion per year for things like operations and maintenance.... [T]otal electricity costs would go up by 22 percent for consumers, the AAF says. Residential customers, who paid an average of $111.67 per month in 2017, would pay an average of about $300 more per year for electricity.

"The Green New Deal also proposes 'overhauling transportation systems ... to eliminate pollution and 19 greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector as much as is technologically feasible.' The AAF's estimate of the cost for this proposal assumes that high-speed trains would replace air travel.... Doing so would cost between $1.3 trillion and $2.7 trillion, the AAF estimates....

"The Green New Deal's jobs guarantee would also cost a considerable amount. The AAF based its estimates here on a 2018 report from the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, which found that reaching full employment would involve putting roughly 10.7 million unemployed or underemployed people to work [which] would cost a total of $543 billion.... The AAF updated some of those numbers with 2019 data, and found that a federal jobs guarantee would cost $547 billion in 2019, and $6.762 trillion from 2020 to [2029].. Both of those numbers would rise if, with a guaranteed job waiting for them, many of those who aren't currently looking for work decide to join the labor force....

"The report also estimates that providing universal health care 'will cost roughly $36 trillion between 2020 and 2029.' The AAF simply built off a 2016 estimate of Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I–Vt.) Medicare for All Plan, which the Center for Health and Economy said would cost $34.67 trillion over 10 years. It's likely an accurate projection, roughly in line with a July 2018 Mercatus Center report, which said Medicare for All would cost the federal government more than $32 trillion over 10 years.

"The fifth aspect of the Green New Deal that AAF addresses is its guarantee of 'affordable, safe, and adequate housing." Simply housing the homeless could cost under $12 billion, AAF estimates.... But the Green New Deal also calls for 'upgrading all existing buildings ... to achieve maximal energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability, including through electrification.' Applying such costs to all housing units ... yields a potential cost of $1.6 trillion to nearly $4.2 trillion."

Read more: https://reason.com/2019/02/25/study-green-new-deal-could-cost-more-tha/

'via Blog this'

3D printing creates a home in a day for $4,000 (video)

Startup to make 3D-printed concrete homes for US$4,000 | CTV News:

April 3, 2018 - "A non-profit partnership is raising money to 3D-print durable and affordable concrete homes in El Salvador, in an effort to offset the global housing crisis. Each single-storey, 650 square-foot home costs US$4,000 to build using a concrete-extruding printing apparatus, which is programmed to create the foundation and walls of the structure....

"Icon co-founder Jason Ballard says 3D-printing ... allows for faster, better and cheaper projects to be completed with much more creativity.... He says printing with the liquid concrete makes all manner of shapes possible, from traditional squares and rectangles to circular and spiral shapes. It also simplifies construction by eliminating the need for drywall, wood framing, insulation and other materials used to build the walls in traditional homes....

"Ballard and Icon partnered with the non-profit group New Story to launch their housing initiative, which is made possible by their concrete-printing apparatus, dubbed the Vulcan. The first home printed by the Vulcan I was built in Austin, Texas, with the 350 square-foot structure taking approximately 48 hours and costing $10,000 to complete. But Icon says its next printer, the Vulcan II, will be able to hit its lofty goal of building a 650 square-foot home for $4,000 in less than a day.

"Icon intends to put the plans for its concrete home up online, so others can use it once the technology becomes more widespread.... The New Story charity is currently accepting sponsors to build homes at a cost of $4,000 per house, with the cost of building a full community tagged at $400,000.“

Read more: https://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/startup-to-make-3d-printed-concrete-homes-for-us-4-000-1.3869268
'via Blog this'

Mississauga Libertarian talks affordable housing

Ontario Libertarian party candidate Mississauga-Lakeshore Jay Ward | Mississauga.com - Chris Clay:

May 11, 2018 - "Age: 60. Occupation: Owner of a small business for five years after a successful business career in management and senior management in various president and CEO positions....

"Where do you live and how long:

"I have been part of the Lakeview community of Mississauga-Lakeshore with my wife and son for 34 years. We love it here and I have been active in the community....

"With average home prices in the city north of $600,000, affordable housing is not exclusively a problem for low-income families. What is your party’s strategy to address rising housing prices and increase the affordable housing stock? 

"Affordable housing is an issue that has not been properly addressed by the main political parties. A good start to making housing more affordable is to replace the land transfer tax with a flat rate instead of a percentage which escalates as the cost of the home increases. The Libertarian party proposes a flat rate of $275.

"The biggest expense to an average family is taxes. Taxes are much more than the cost of their home. A home can be made more affordable by reducing taxes, [letting] people keep their earnings to invest in a home. The Libertarian party would cancel the carbon tax which directly increases the cost of heating your home and makes everything more expensive including building new houses.

"The Libertarian party would also cut hydro rates in half which will give people more money for housing. (see http://www.libertarian.on.ca/2018/hydro for detailed explanation.) The Libertarian party would reduce the 'Size and Scope of Government' which translates into lower taxes leaving more disposal income, greatly helping to make home ownership more affordable.'"

Read more: https://www.mississauga.com/news-story/8602827-ontario-libertarian-party-candidate-mississauga-lakeshore-jay-ward/
'via Blog this'
• Candidate's website: https://libertarian.on.ca/Jay_Ward

UK Libertarian Party gets this landlord's vote (video)

Property118 | My Next Vote Goes To The Libertarian Party - Property118 - Mark Alexander:

November 23, 2017 - "When I emigrated to Malta I said I would never vote for a UK political party ever again, even though I am still entitled to do so. Well I have changed my mind, and if you watch this video you might understand why.....

"PS – I have also paid £45 to become an official party member https://libertarianpartyuk.com/membership-join/"

Read more: https://www.property118.com/next-vote-goes-libertarian-party/
'via Blog this'

Did lack of zoning contribute to Houston flooding?

Don't blame Houston’s lack of zoning for Harvey flooding | TheHill - Scott Beyer:

September 3, 2017 - "Houston was recently victim to the largest rainfall in U.S. history, a 52” deluge from Hurricane Harvey that’s left many parts of the metro still underwater. Houston is also arguably the nation’s least-regulated metro area for land use, featuring a central city that doesn’t even have a zoning code.

"This correlation is, apparently, enough for the media to conclude that one has to do with the other.... Houston, wrote the Washington Post, 'is the largest U.S. city to have no zoning laws, part of a hands-off approach to urban planning that may have contributed to catastrophic flooding from Hurricane Harvey and left thousands of residents in harm’s way.'

"The oddest thing about this analysis is that it misses the actual details of Houston’s land-use policy. The city proper, while technically without zoning, still preserves many of the regulations found in other cities, which inhibit density.... Much of the sprawl development being criticized, meanwhile, wasn’t built in the city anyway. Since 2010, Houston has been America’s fastest-growing metro in net terms, adding 850,000. Only 200,000 of this has been in the city, while the rest has arisen in boomburbs like Katy and Sugar Land. And those municipalities have zoning codes that, again, discourage density.

“'This is not a zoning-related problem,' Jim Blackburn, a civil engineering professor at Rice University, said to me about the flooding....

"The idea that Houston’s land use decisions were the main cause for flooding is absurd on its face. No amount of regulation will properly absorb or confine a year’s-worth of rainwater falling in 5 days. New York City, which is basically the anti-Houston — a dense, regulated city — was devastated by Superstorm Sandy, when just a few inches of rain and strong winds caused flooding in all 5 boroughs.

"And the idea that Houston’s land-use decisions were even a minor factor in the flooding looks increasingly baseless.... The wetlands that have been lost to development since 1990 would have absorbed an estimated 4 billion gallons; the rainfall that Harvey dumped onto the Houston area was an estimated 20 trillion [20,000 billion - gd] gallons....

"Blackburn believes that there are still measures Houston can take to lessen future flooding.... Even if strong growth continues in Houston, it will need to be different — which he believes, counterintuitive to many commentators, should mean more market-oriented. Blackburn said that a FEMA flood insurance program has distorted settlement patterns, incentivizing many to locate near bayous or in flood plains. And he thinks that Houston’s future development will be denser, and built in more elevated areas.

"The irony is that Houston, because of its looser regulations, will likelier tolerate such dense development. This contrasts with, say, New Orleans, another flood-prone city where much of the housing remains in flood plains, but where zoning laws restrict construction in wealthier, higher-elevation areas.... Houston’s lack of zoning and minimal regulation, while not the cause of flooding, may in the future be the greatest control against it."

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/state-local-politics/349021-opinion-dont-blame-houstons-lack-of-zoning-laws-for
'via Blog this'