[lwansbrough]

> Changing zoning is pretty short sited if you have the goal of having an area that people love to love in.

NIMBYism. I would rather have 6x more houses that people can AFFORD to live than 1/6th the homes owned by the richest people in the city who _really love it._

You can design beautiful neighbourhoods that are much much denser than they are now.

Single family zoning should be abolished in this city if we have any intention of solving the housing crisis.

[rtlfe]

> I would rather have 6x more houses that people can AFFORD to live than

Not to mention the huge positive impacts this would have on walkability, transit, climate change, etc.

[akhmatova]

> Changing zoning is pretty short sited if you have the goal of having an area that people love to love in.

NIMBYism.

Name calling as an argument technique.

You can design beautiful neighbourhoods that are much much denser than they are now.

In theory. Sometimes it actually happens in reality, too.

Most of the time though, when developers and their paid servants (aka your elected representatives) get together, something rather different from this glossy vision you seem to have ends up happening. In most cases the end reuslt is not at all beautiful, and (when you actually crunch the numbers) not all that affordable, either.

Not too infrequently it devolves into outright shenanigans, with profound betrayals of trust, and huge swaths of development opportunity more or less handed out to connected donors and/or other political kingpins (in exchange for who knows what votes or other favors they have to offer).

That's how it goes, and like the Leonard Cohen song -- everybody knows.

I agree that zoning has its pros and cons. And just because we did things a certain way 50 year ago, doesn't mean we have to keep doing it that way.

But the attitude you're presented sounds (to these jaded ears) well - saccharine. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to be fundamentally circumspect about the promised benefits of many (if not most) proposed zoning changes. There's no need to assume that anyone who doesn't share your own enthusiasm for such changes is (as you imply) just fundamentally self-centered - or filthy rich.

[cameronpm]

Great response, I agree 100%.

[hyperhopper]

> Single family zoning should be abolished in this city if we have any intention of solving the housing crisis.

What about people that want to have a party on a Friday, but NIMBYs in an apartment complex throw the book at anybody that has fun past 10PM?

[jseliger]

Abolishing mandatory single-unit zoning is different from saying no one can have such a unit. People should have a wide variety of housing options available based on their needs and price points.

[zaptheimpaler]

It seems like we really should be able to make soundproof apartments today. I’m definitely not an expert but it’s hard to believe that we can’t we make thick walls with the right material between apartments.

A lot of construction and transportation seems like it’s needlessly bad due to underinvestment and old equipment. I think we can make almost noiseless EV cars like Teslas today, no-compromises high density housing, quieter construction equipment and so much more.

[VintageCool]

We definitely can. The apartment I lived in from 2018-2019 was ghostly quiet. For the first five months, I could easily have been convinced that we were the only people that lived on our floor.

[imtringued]

Sound proofing is absolutely trivial to install and its benefits by far exceed its costs... It should be absolutely mandatory on any multi-family building.

[sbarre]

I see you have also lived in Funcouver!

[0ldskool]

Require multi-family complex's to have an indoor party room available for booking?