Even at a more local level ( https://techcrunch.com/2014/04/14/sf-housing/ ), the problem is complex with many stakeholders. How do you get everyone to agree and try to reach a better solution?
That sounds great, but think of it this way: a 200-unit luxury apartment complex that includes a shithole in the back with 40 units that lack parking and a separate access door would be exempt from local oversight. Does that sound like a pattern for success to you?
In other words, can cities simply down zone desirable areas and force the developer to apply for exemptions on a case by case basis which is tantamount to the current city reviews?
Check out the Vienna system:
http://www.governing.com/topics/economic-dev/gov-affordable-...
We'd need a radical cultural change to allow that kind of thing here, but considering how things are going with prices, this is a good time for a real change.
Edit: If you disagree it's quite simple to simple mentioning the relevant market were this has happened instead of downvoting. This emotionalism of HN is really getting annoying these days.
Prices almost never go down organically because it actually gets harder to build as things gets more developed, stake holders would have to take real losses to the detriment of the local economy, housing in these areas are almost essentially always a sellers market etc.
The "just build more" meme on HN is BS. In essentially no popular cities where this have been done have prices gone down or necessarily stabilized including the common examples of NY, HK or Paris.