I know it's been an American ideal for the past century but how is it physically possible with a fast growing population of Southern California?
It's not.
The roads can't even sustain the current population.
Building more single family housing away from where people work and shop will make things many times worse.
This unsustainable romantic idea created the car clustefuck we have now and it will only get worse especially if we don't invest in alternative transportation and start being smart about how and where we build.
Ifailalot thinks it's "what I want", it's actually the only choice we have. Ignoring the problem is just beyond utopian.
Imagine if I tried to teach you about photography. If I didn't know what I was talking about, but forcefully put out my opinion. How would you reply to Me?
This is kind of like that...
Roads and transportation are not issues. The fees to get a building permit fully pay for the infrastructure. Property taxes pay for the maintenance. A tract developer builds the streets, and infrastructure, up to government requirements, and then grants (dedicates) the property to the government. Again, property taxes and gas taxes are supposed to pay for the upkeep.
A side topic could be the diversion of those funds, but maybe later.
Developers don't build away from markets and employment. A great example is thousand oaks. Single family homes surrounding industry and shopping complexes. You could live your entire life in a five mile radius.
High density residential also has a place for those who either don't want yard maintenance, or can't afford it. Common areas are for the community.
The actual problem is folks who can't be bothered to take care of their stuff, and want someone else to pick up after them.
It's a big free world. Vote for the county/ city leaders who share your vision. Work hard to afford what you want.
But sniveling that the other guy needs to agree with your vision is tyranny.
Don't be a tyrant.