https://apple.news/A_cyB6uiFQR-1dEcEQ490uw

https://www.wsj.com/articles/t...n-growth-11580738467

“Southern Town Was Growing So Fast, It Passed a Ban on Growth

Residents, most of whom came from out of state, are fed up with crowded roads and schools and boil-water advisories
...”

Last year’s developer is this year’s conservationist.

Can't read it -- paywall. But in AZ, developers could build out as far as the eye could see, and then some, but bear 0% of the cost for building the infrastructure out to their developments. I think if the cost were shared between the developer and the city there would be slower, more sensible growth with fewer boil days and power outages. Maybe.

Of course PDX is famous for its urban growth boundary, which has its pros and cons. Density and housing cost inside the boundary are both high, and it's becoming less and less viable to live in the city "core." So people are buying further away and driving in (despite pretty good transit options). People won't leave their cars. This isn't exactly helping the environment. On the other hand, it's true that we have great locally sourced food, and it's easy to get out of town--in the sense that "out of town" is fairly close by. It just might take you an hour sitting in traffic to get there....

It's a complex problem.