SF Bay Area is not really representative of California as a whole. Most people outside of the dense cores have a place for a small garden. State is large and diverse. Los Angeles is a lot less dense and most people have at least a balcony on which you can grow stuff in pots. Won’t sustain you as the only source, but will provide greens and some variety. Yards are pretty common and usually green. Water shortages have led to some converting to hardscape, but that can be reversed.
Prop 13 is an issue, but the level of development opposition in Bay Area is another matter all together compared to the rest of the state. Where little you can build developers end up cramming every last inch with profit-producing structures. Couple with crappy commuting infrastructure and you have what we are living.
You can drive out as far as fairfield, about 70 miles outside of the bay area and still see housing communities packed together like slums with nothing but yellow and green for miles in every direction.
The lots in those communities (including Fairfield) look to be reasonably sized - some pools even. That’s plenty to have a few beds of greens. It’s not acre-sized, but that’s hardly a requirement.
What do you propose then, Los Altos or Atherton-sized lots?
10K sq ft lots isn't too much to ask for is it? especially when there's open land in every direction you can see as far as the horizon. It doesn't even look like all that open land is used for anything at all.
i'll never understand the CA obsession with keeping so much land undeveloped at the expense of humanity.
Prop 13 is an issue, but the level of development opposition in Bay Area is another matter all together compared to the rest of the state. Where little you can build developers end up cramming every last inch with profit-producing structures. Couple with crappy commuting infrastructure and you have what we are living.