Sure, we can't print more ground to build on. But it's another cause of increasing real estate prices here in the Netherlands.
Probably need to zone some of that agricultural land (60% of land usage in the netherlands) into housing, if we want to give young homeowners a chance at owning property.
I think the disruption will come from the civil planning side of the equation. When we can figure out how to build a city on the edge of Arizona that people actually want to live in then we can begin to leverage more efficient and automated building techniques like 3d printing houses and stuff.
It takes more than houses; also entertainment, food, infrastructure, jobs, etc. Otherwise, you're 100% right, location is king and nobody wants to move away from a fun/profitable/valuable city to live in an abandoned mining town in Oklahoma just so they can own a home.
As dystopian as it might sound, I wonder if there is some way to "crowdfund" or "preorder" a new township location. Everyone signs up, pledges like 1,000 USD or something with a lease extending at least 3+ years. And developers can use that money to build an entirely new township in a location with cheaper land. This might help alleviate the problems that come along during a cold start with requiring critical mass adoption before a location is desireable to live in. (Not suggesting this exact course because having an entire town owned by a single developer sounds like a capitalist hellscape; just thinking out loud, I don't know what the actual solution would be)
I believe something similar is already happening with something like the Culdesac project. (I have no affiliation with this project, just so happen to live near it and have heard about it a few times) : https://culdesac.com/
Yes, although in hindsight it's easy to say that was poorly executed. It looks far too big and tried to be more than it should have been in my opinion. I'm thinking more along the lines of small neighborhoods on the edge of a city that can provide stronger logistical support.
Closer to Sun City Arizona.
> ... This caught the eye of the FTC, which said the advertising was deceptive and ordered the city’s developers to stop ...
This is also an interesting point in the article. Was it actually a scam or just overly ambitious and poorly executed?
