It is sad and strange to see a country with so much land area and such low population density moving in the direction of ever greater congestion -- and now in the name of the revolution.

...while upper-middle-class, single-family-home neighborhoods have had the privilege of remaining the same.

Although it is not the author's avowed view, they do seem to be operating from a frame where we have to put people's private property to public use in the name of social progress. For example, the way they use the word "privilege" here. Not selling one's home or, along with one's neighbours, not changing a neighbourhood's zoning is not a privilege, it's a pretty ordinary exercise of one's autonomy.

I'm not sure that the title accurately reflects the article that people don't want to devalue their home values by moving apartment blocks next to their million dollar homes. Somehow everyone in California is a liberal, and the article cites Massachusetts as a state allowing denser urban areas. Maybe the article would be better titled wealthy people in suburbs don't want apartments next to their homes. Reading other articles by the author he seems to think the only things that matter happen in San Francisco. Might want to get out of his bubble. There's a wide range of liberals and conservatives with a wide range of perspectives in a country as large as ours.

The title isn't accurate: California is not a monolithic political entity, and the Bay Area especially is not very liberal.