When you walk down any street in the Netherlands you never feel claustrophobic, yet the Netherlands is the most densely populated country in the western world—not including micro-states. Zoom in even more, Amsterdam is one of the most prominent cities in Europe, yet the urban experience when you walk around doesn’t feel anymore overwhelming than that of Portsmouth, NH. The streets are lined with narrow brick four-story buildings with cheese shops at ground level and apartments above. You can’t say the same thing about other cities: London, Paris, Los Angeles, and especially not New York.
Conversely, another datapoint I will preface this article with is that the State of New Jersey—by far the most densely populated American state—is only slightly less densely populated than the Netherlands. Yet when you drive around the average town in New Jersey, you are overwhelmed with traffic, rude drivers, strip malls, jug handles, Jersey barriers (they are called walls in NJ), and parking lots as far as the eye can see. What went wrong?
The answer is bad design and the abandonment of traditional development principles all reinforced by ridiculous land-use codes. The turning point in the United States was when Euclidian zoning (i.e.: separated residential, commercial, and industrial zones) was ruled constitutional in 1926 by the Supreme Court case Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. The situation was exacerbated after WWII with massive population growth and massive socialized highway projects.
As an aside, ironically, the namesake of Euclidian zoning is not Euclidian geometry, but rather a village in Ohio. Euclidian geometry is the study of flat surfaces, lines, and angles.
The US and Canada have been stuck with Euclidian zoning for the past 100 years. Everywhere else in the world, zoning allows for some level of mixed-use development, but your mileage may vary.
Zoning is largely done at the national-level in many European countries. It’s very rigid, but it does allow for better mixed use and missing middle development than that of North America. Japan has a mix of national and local control for zoning and is by far the best zoning model in the civilized world in my opinion. Their system demonstrates how standardized zoning can actually increase freedom, affordability, and development options, rather than restrict them.
There are 12 different zone types in Japan and they are standard throughout the country. In New Hampshire, by comparison, each town decides their own respective Byzantine zone types and it’s a mess. Japan also has a great deal of local control in the sense that local authorities get to decide where to apply each of the 12 zone types. Where Japan gets even more compelling from a libertarian perspective is that, for the most part, each level higher in zone type allows for land use permitted in any of the previous zone categories.
For example, industrial zones have the highest zoning level and are the most permissive zones. Not only can you build a factory in an industrial zone, but you can also build mixed-use residential-businesses and detached single family homes. The lowest category of zoning is light residential. Interestingly even in that zone type, Japan allows home owners to designate up to 50 square meters (500 sqft) to operate as a commercial storefront. So even in the most restrictive neighborhoods, people can operate small boutique shops and small markets. Most towns in Japan designate most of their land as industrial zones to allow for free-form libertarian development.
When it comes time to build on land in Japan there isn’t a Byzantine permitting process, as long as the building conforms to the national standards and set-back formulas, you are good to go.
Another limitation in North American development is fire codes. In anything taller than 2 stories, most North American jurisdictions require two stairwells for egress. Seattle is one notable exception. Most European countries allow for up to 4 stories with just one stairwell. This has a cascading effect basically causing developers in North America to not build many multi-bedroom apartments in town centers. Most new high and medium density development in North America is limited to studio and 1-bedroom apartments. Allowing for 1 stairwell allows for ergonomic layouts that make better use of building corners. Most middle class families simply don’t have the option to live in town and city centers in North America largely in part because of the fire code effects and the zoning regulations previously mentioned.
All of what I’ve outlined is not to say that my goal is to force everyone into shoebox, Soviet-style apartments. It’s quite the contrary. The goal is to increase availability of all types of housing, while also preserving open space, so that those who appreciate living out in the middle of nowhere aren’t inundated by sprawl, and so they too have more options.
My thesis is that the masses don’t want to homestead out in the middle of nowhere, don’t want to live in cookie cutter suburbia, and they don’t want to live next to the inner city projects. Rather, the masses would prefer to live in traditional New England urban villages that are similar to that of contemporary Japan and the Netherlands. These villages offer a proven model that combines density with livability, showing how we can build communities that people actually want to live in rather than just places they can afford to live.
