Not really.
Supply and demand is of course real, but density doesn’t necessarily imply lower real estate prices (as evidenced by the fact that most of the densest census tracts in the country are among the most expensive). The additional supply that would be required to really change equilibrium prices would be enormous, and is not going to come from allowing duplexes.
Generally speaking, building more housing units in expensive neighborhoods should just result in a higher number of expensive housing units. You’d get lower prices if you make the area less desirable, of course - that’s how massive subsidized housing projects actually reduce real estate prices.
And it’s not necessarily single-family housing that’s the problem. In older cities with row houses, built 4-5 stories tall on narrow lots with small gardens, you have more density (based on square footage or residents per acre) than this would allow and yet you often have very high prices.
Still, it’s a good move because single-family zoning, like required parking minimums, is a stupid distortion of the real estate market.
__________________
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
|