The last page of Sonia Hirt’s book Zoned in the USA lays out a key paradox in the American zoning system:
Isn’t it ironic that American residential space is so sacredly residential (so protected from intrusion through land-use law, that is) only because it is so commercial (because it is an object of trade rather than an object of our sentiments)?
Perhaps this another piece of evidence that single-family homes are one of the biggest objects of American consumption as well as key pieces in the American economic system.
Legally Sociable 
Pingback: Bringing medical clinics to vacant shopping mall space | Legally Sociable
Pingback: To get richer, get the right job and then “buy a home in a neighborhood with a lot of zoning restrictions” | Legally Sociable
Pingback: When two suburban residential developments border each other and have clear differences | Legally Sociable
Pingback: A denser suburbia in California and the rest of the United States | Legally Sociable
Pingback: Doctors connecting health and land use policies | Legally Sociable
Pingback: Chicago aldermen and affordable housing, public housing | Legally Sociable
Pingback: The importance and consequences of separating single-family homes from other land uses in the United States | Legally Sociable
Pingback: The arguments for and against banning zoning for only single-family homes | Legally Sociable
Pingback: Still a limited tiny house movement | Legally Sociable
Pingback: Looking to global examples to address housing crunches in expensive cities | Legally Sociable
Pingback: Fights between suburban neighbors turn more rancorous, according to lawyers | Legally Sociable