Why Japan Looks the Way it Does: Zoning

The best videos on this (in my opinion) which compliment urbankchoze's post: ‣ Not Just Bikes: link ‣ Life Where I'm from: ▶ this video

There are two great videos specifically on Japanese zoning and narrow streets: Life Where I'm From, on zoning: ▶ this video Not Just Bikes, narrow streets: link

The developed world has one great example of functional housing policy: Japan. A single policy that allows for unique neighborhoods, affordable houses, supports small businesses, and enables walkable cities. Just.... do what we know already works. For anyone not familiar, here is a primer ▶ this video

If you are interested in why the Japanese/Tokyo urban design works then look at these 2 links from the "Life where I am from" Youtube channel Why Japan Looks the Way it Does: Zoning ▶ this video What a Typical Tokyo Neighbourhood is Like link

The lax zoning laws (at least compared to the US) allow mixed use so you have more things within walking distance. This was a fascinating video on it: ▶ this video

Yes, land use is one factor. What is interesting is that the dynamic actually flips once there is adequate zoning. Take a look at this[0] video on Tokyo zoning and how he talks about living in an industrial zoned area. He talks about how it's cheaper to do so, and if you want to move to a single family zoned area, it's actually more expensive! Under the current system, landowners want their own land to be zoned as high as possible, while they want everyone else's land to be zoned as low as possible. Since 1 < everyone else, when people vote on zoning it is zoned as low as possible. With a LVT the system flips, everyone wants their land to be zoned as low as they desire, and they want everyone else's land to be zoned as high as possible. They would only accept land zoned restrictively if those people would pay higher taxes for the exclusive use of it. This is a system with proper incentives. [0]: ▶ this video

The _Life Where I'm From_ episode on zoning in Japan is useful, I think, as a point of comparison. Zoning in Japan can still be pretty complex (limits on floorspace, setback, and angles), but allows for environments that many people like. ▶ this video

I like the way that Japan handles zoning. It's based on population densities. Localities can designate industrial and commercial areas, but can't deviate from federal guidelines to prevent growth. Instead of single family homes they allow triplexes where a percentage of space can be used for a low-impact business, like a barber shop or something. They have setbacks geared towards making sure that you don't build three stories on top of your neighbor's house. They have neighborhoods. They don't have a housing shortage. They don't have a system that doesn't empower developers who want to clear-cut cheap land on the outskirts of town and build sprawling anti-social subdivisions of oversized identical houses. Here's some more information: ▶ this video

I found this video yesterday: "Why Japan Looks the Way it Does: Zoning" which was very illuminating ▶ this video

A huge amount of residential homes are actually in light industry zoned areas. I learned this surprising fact here: ▶ this video

Exactly this. This is a cultural issue, more than anything else. Countries like Japan have taken a profoundly different approach to urban development, and have more mixed-use zones (single-family, multi-family, high-rise, etc). ▶ this video

> Define “significantly impose”. That’s the basic problem, I agree. > existing near someone can have effects that are easy to justify in court I had the impression this was a "mob rule" problem, that local voters were voting for zoning laws that limit the quality and quantity of new housing. I admit to not understanding the legal or moral justification. It just doesn't seem right to micromanage others to the extent that occurs today. There are other countries that are much more flexible, like Japan [0]. Instead of single family single use zoning they start with three story multi-use housing. Some places in the U.S. are moving in this direction. > decreasing or limiting increase on future land values That can be flipped around. Someone who opposes new housing is taking value from the people who could have made use of that new housing, had it been allowed. [0] ▶ this video