Now it all makes sense.

As we and others have noted this legislative session, there’s been a huge onslaught of pro-”sprawl” bills, most of which invoke “affordable housing.” That is, if we limit local governments ability to regulate new housing and shut citizens out of the approval process, building homes will be cheaper, and the savings will be passed on to homebuyers. Supposedly.

Indeed, “affordable housing” is invoked so often in this type of legislation that you begin to wonder if something is up. And maybe something is.

Earlier this week Bloomberg reported on “Trump Homes”:

Builders are working on a plan for a massive program to develop “Trump Homes” that would address the US affordability crisis while allowing private capital to deploy many billions of dollars.

Lennar Corp. and Taylor Morrison Home Corp. are among the firms that have worked on the proposal, which calls for builders to sell entry-level homes into a pathway-to-ownership program funded by private investors, according to people familiar with the plan….

The size of the program would ultimately depend on how many builders decide to participate, though a person involved in the plan said that builders have discussed aiming for as many as 1 million homes.

And they have to get built somewhere.

This may not be the reason we’re seeing so many pro-”sprawl” bills this year, but it dovetails perfectly. Should “Trump Homes” be regulated as thoroughly as any other development, or should we ease the regulatory burden and make it easier to build “starter homes,” perhaps on infill lots or in “agricultural enclaves?”

What’s more important: a thorough environmental review, robust public participation and indeed a sufficient supply of water to support the additional building – or should we minimize these things in order to throw up more homes, quicker, in order to keep costs down?

Bottom line, given what we’ve already seen out of the Legislature this year, and now this “Trump Homes” idea, it should be clear that the pressure to “sprawl” is only going to intensify, the impact of sprawl on water and land use patterns is going to worsen.

Yet if we dismantle prudent regulations to expedite affordable housing, we risk undermining the very quality of life that attracts people to Florida in the first place.