| > Are you perhaps being a tad hyperbolic? Not even a little bit. Go read about exclusionary zoning in general or see your sibling comment's link for some reading on Vancouver specifically. > Is it fair to say that the suburb layout is generally considered ideal to live in? Is it considered ideal? Maybe. Is it actually ideal? No. Aside from the huge negative impacts on pricing and equality that we've already discussed there's the environmental impact, isolation, car dependence, etc, etc. > I would argue that most people would move to a suburb rather than a dense city all other things equal. This is unfortunately true for Americans and I'd guess Canadians as well. I think this is due to some combination of: - The absurd "American dream" vision that's been pushed by car manufacturers and other companies for many decades. - Most American cities aren't actually very good, so most Americans have never experienced the alternative. - Fox News and other conservative media pushing the narrative that cities are infested with criminals, terrorists, etc. > Maybe sprinkle in some high-density apartments around to supplement the single-family housing? Great. This is what would happen if there wasn't zoning. |
> Is it considered ideal? Maybe. Is it actually ideal? No.
Ideal in what? Ideal has to be measured by some metric, so which one or which ones?
What makes these discussions interminable is that some of the metrics are objective but some are subjective so there can't be any one ideal answer.
An objective measure is housing units per square km. Easy to measure, it's just math. Obviously high-rise apartment buildings maximize that metric. So is that the only metric that should ever be considered? Or the most important one?
Then there are also the subjective metrics of niceness. While many people might be happy living in those high-rises, many people won't do it.
Should the density maximizers be the only people who get a vote in these matters? If so, why is that? Why are they more special citizens than others? That sure doesn't sound fair.
Or should they get no vote? Well that's not fair either.
So clearly there can't be one ideal answer, it's compromises all the way.
Many people will have legitimate preferences that differ from yours, that in no way makes them "absurd".