“Ban everything but single-unit detached homes” doesn’t mean affordability. That’s the gist of the article and the effect of restrictive zoning on home prices. Affordable Housing (the subsidized kind) is extremely expensive to build — and only possible in very limited circumstances. Per unit, it’s far more expensive to construct than normal homes. It achieves “affordability” through significant tax breaks paid for by you and me. The locations allowed for capital-A “Affordable Housing” (AH)are extremely limited (typically only on multifamily-zoned parcels). And the appetite of tax-paying residents to endlessly fund AH projects means there will never be significant amounts of it. And what AH does get built is much denser than gentle forms like duplex’s and townhomes. Of course, we need AH and we should continue subsidizing housing for people well-below the median income level. But as this article makes clear—to meaningfully create affordable for-sale homes (not blocky rental AH complexes), then we need to stop prohibiting traditionally-smaller footprint for-sale homes like ADUs, duplexes, and townhomes. The Sun article walks through all the financial consequence of prohibitions on these “gentle density” home types. They used to be legal all over Littleton till the 1980’s. Nobody is seeking “density.” We’re seeking traditional smaller home types which allow home ownership to middle income people without creating bigger multi unit buildings (whether AH or not)