As California continues to face a significant housing shortage, state and local leaders have focused on increasing density in existing metro areas, loosening zoning restrictions, and expanding transit-oriented development. While these efforts aim to address growing demand, the state’s largest population centers remain congested, expensive, and stretched beyond the capacity of their existing infrastructure.
Meanwhile, large areas of undeveloped land remain in inland and desert regions of the state. These areas are often excluded from housing discussions, in part due to zoning limitations, infrastructure challenges, and environmental considerations. Yet the possibility of building entirely new urban centers—rather than continuing to add housing within the footprint of existing cities—is a topic that receives relatively little attention in California policy circles.
Internationally, some countries have addressed similar challenges by developing new cities. Kazakhstan’s relocation of its capital to Astana in the 1990s is one example. Designed and constructed on previously undeveloped land, the city now functions as a modern capital and has contributed to national decentralization efforts. In the United States, new cities have historically emerged around economic hubs, infrastructure projects, or strategic planning efforts—ranging from company towns to military bases to the planned development of Washington, D.C.
Supporters of this approach argue that building on open land may offer long-term cost advantages. Infrastructure in existing urban centers often requires costly retrofitting and expansion, whereas new cities can be designed with modern systems from the outset. Transit, power grids, and digital infrastructure can be integrated from day one, potentially reducing long-term public investment.
One obstacle frequently cited is cost. However, a new city does not necessarily imply full state or federal funding. Private developers typically fund residential and commercial construction, and local governments may capture tax revenue through property, sales, and business activity. Public investment may focus on initial infrastructure, such as road access, zoning, and basic utilities.
At present, development in many of California’s open regions is limited not by a lack of interest but by regulatory and logistical barriers. Even projects backed by private capital face challenges in areas without zoning designations, road access, or water infrastructure.
As California continues to weigh strategies for growth, some planners and policy experts suggest that enabling the development of new population centers could be one potential component of a broader housing and infrastructure framework.
