Look what I said about the cost of building taller.Land is limiting in other places like NYC too but that did not prevent other excellent solutions, such as building skinny sky scraper apartments for billionaires. Ultra wealthy apartments were not for the homeless directly, but they served to increased the supply of housing for everyone. That is just one idea that you won't see from any California democrats.. Their main problem is political on a local level where existing home owners and landlords actually want high prices yet lower taxes for those people already in those homes! They refuse redevelopment of existing structures in the name of protecting historical buildings or some other environmental absurdity artificially causing scarcity. It is what they want and it causes homelessness protecting profits for the existing home owners.Build smaller? There are high fixed costs from building. The reality is that in a market with a high fixed cost and lower costs for improvements the market will strongly favor the options with more improvements. I grew up in a perfectly good for it's time middle class house. Looking at the market around here there's nothing that small being built. Nobody would buy it.
Build taller? The reality is the price per square foot for a building goes up as you make it taller. The costs of going vertical exceed the space gained. (Note that single family two story dwellings do not follow this pattern as the fire codes get much more strict in multi-family buildings.)
Yeah, let's look at Shanghai. I have family that own condos in Shanghai. In every case those condos cost more per square foot than our place here, for a vastly inferior place. There are cheap places to be had far from the city--but that's government folly. China was obsessed with maintaining the 7% growth rate their economy had been doing and refused to recognize that that was only possible while playing catch-up, they way over-built and now there are a bunch of places out in the sticks that sit empty. I really wouldn't want to own property out there--what's the maintenance going to be like a few years down the road?! (We've had similar but far more localized issues like this here in the US. Before the prevalence of HOAs there would be deals where the developer built out a community with a special assessment district on the community paying for the bonds that funded the roads etc. Project fails, not many houses exist, but the infrastructure does and the bonds still exist. They get spread over the few owners rather than the whole community.)Look to China and other sensible housing in the world. They have proven it is possible using contemporary and advanced construction to house everyone in affordable housing but they did not do it with liberal campaigns from the democrat party protecting historical neighborhoods and prop 13 tax. If you look at Shanghai today it looks like an advanced construction. LA and San Francisco looks pretty much like they did when I grew up in the 1960's with little change except for much more preventable homelessness in both places. Chicago and Detroit are other democrat run strongholds that have run themselves into the ditch (like California is doing today) still looking like they did when they were once successful in the 1800's.