I don't know anything about housing, but wouldn't building more homes be contrary to environmentally conscious voters? That's why I am not eager to get behind more homes being built.
Building denser housing like apartments is absolutely better for the environment, for several reasons.
1. Less Land is used / habitats destroyed.
2. Because less land is used in construction, the suburbs do not sprawl as far. This means shorter commute times and less cars, leading to lower emissions.
3. Less Lawns -> less water being used
4. Heating/AC is also more energy efficient in apartments, as any specific apartment will only be exposed to the elements from one/two sides instead of 4.
I'm sure there are others as well, but these are what came to mind.
Ah, so I'm guessing since all the land these apartments would be built on would also be the land that new houses would be built on anyways? Or could we stop more homes from being built to save our remaining lands where animals can roam?
