Does Land Conservation Drive Housing Costs?

A new study in the San Francisco Bay Area says no, that had there been no controls in place there would be only 6.5% more housing built over the past 50 years.
April 7, 2010, 2pm PDT | Tim Halbur
Share Tweet LinkedIn Email Comments

The reason is that the Bay Area land being conserved is unsuitable for most housing, and affordable housing in particular.

John Wildermuth writes, "Over the years, developers and business groups have complained that converting so much land into protected open space has made what's left so expensive that young families can no longer move into the area.

"Now we have the research that says that's not really true," said Michele Beasley, a senior field representative of the Greenbelt Alliance. "We have an affordable housing problem, which won't be solved by million-dollar homes on hillside lots.""

Full Story:
Published on Sunday, April 4, 2010 in The San Francisco Chronicle
Share Tweet LinkedIn Email