The idea that owners of homes should be able to make it (almost) illegal to build more homes in an area with some of the highest housing costs in the country is grossly immoral. It enriches homeowners at the expense of other's misery. Grandkids grow up without knowing their grandparents, careers are stunted, and lives are wasted on horrendous commutes (or, considering the safety of driving, ended entirely).
When a building is proposed, the benefactors are diffuse - any of the people looking for a home will benefit from its existence. But the people who oppose it are concentrated - anyone who lives near the new building. For too long our planning system has only considered the latter, and nobody has spoken for the person who will be seeking a home in the future (though groups like SFBARF come to mind).
When a building is proposed, the benefactors are diffuse - any of the people looking for a home will benefit from its existence. But the people who oppose it are concentrated - anyone who lives near the new building. For too long our planning system has only considered the latter, and nobody has spoken for the person who will be seeking a home in the future (though groups like SFBARF come to mind).