Many parts of California are already beyond 100% capacity for certain pieces of infrastructure like transportation, schools, water, and sewers. So I only support more housing in those areas if building permits are directly coupled with equivalent infrastructure upgrades.
That's not really true except perhaps on the shallowest level. There's a lot of environmental issues, pre-1914 water rights, short-term climate issues like ENSO and MJO, and crop choices that have caused California to experience water shortages. Maybe in some cases we can put crops under solar panels to save water[0], or reclaim more water through toilet-to-tap programs. You know, through infrastructure.
Reductionist statements like yours never really reflect any real-world policy environment. The real world is messy and complicated.
To push in a different direction, there isn't enough water for more people while keeping the amount and types of agriculture in California constant. Prioritize residential water use over agricultural rather than aggressively doing the reverse, and you'd probably see improvement. Singapore and Hong Kong are very strong arguments to me against the idea that California couldn't handle more.
