In response to concerns raised by some local authorities, academics, and urban planners regarding the proposed amendments to the General Urban Planning and Construction Ordinance presented by the government, I invite an open and honest debate: If urban planning in Chile is already too slow in times of peace, then that pace becomes critical in times of urgency. Harvard economist Edward Glaeser has demonstrated that current zoning and restrictive regulations, such as those in Chile, function as a "tax" that artificially inflates housing prices, disproportionately affecting young people, seniors, and low-income individuals who lack access to credit. The government's proposal is not a deregulation or a neoliberal foundational reform, as some claim, but rather a pragmatic and risky effort to reactivate the economy. Furthermore, it seeks to expand the supply of affordable housing in terms of size, format, and location, recognizing demographic changes and investment in public transportation. The controversial change from a density of 4 inhabitants per household to 2 inhabitants per household does not mean that the number of people in a neighborhood will double; it is the same number of people defined in the zoning plan, but in smaller homes that are more in line with demographic realities. Today, 1/5 of households in Chile are single-person households, and yet we continue to demand housing for four people and social housing units of over 55 square meters. Those who claim that this will promote so-called "vertical ghettos" are constructing a fallacy, as there are other parameters that limit them; and "ghettos" were precisely the result of poor planning, market failures, and greed. These failures can be corrected if planners, regulators, and inspectors do their jobs properly, along with the self-regulation of the real estate industry. As an urban planner, I advocate for planning, but for less and better planning. As Kent Larson, director of the MIT CityScienceLab, predicted last year in Concepción: Artificial Intelligence is challenging and will change urban planning, governance, regulation, and management in three key areas: (I) Permitting: With Artificial Intelligence and "Blockchain," building permits will go from taking 3 years to a maximum of 3 months, and their progress will be published on digital transparency boards. (II) Codes and Standards: These will move away from being general and discretionary and become flexible and performance-based, avoiding errors such as the recently imposed thermal standard. (III) Zoning Plans and Ordinances: These will become dynamic, evidence-based, modeled in real-time, and include transparent incentive mechanisms and conditions. Traditional urban planning is currently challenged by new demographic, social, economic, and technological dynamics, and we cannot allow planners themselves to squander this opportunity due to issues of agency, capture, or ideological positions. Resisting change will only deepen the housing and urban crisis. By Pablo Allard, Dean of the Faculty of Architecture, UDD. NEWSLETTER. Opinion. Saturday. Ideas in tension, contrasting perspectives, and a clear analysis: elements to reveal the issues that divide opinions and will shape the agenda. By subscribing, you are accepting the Terms and Conditions and the Privacy Policies of La Tercera.