So, how exactly does "the absence of something like a land value tax (...) cause distortions in the market when things change", all other factors being equal?
I fail do get that point and in your example, you don't explain how property value increases would have not happened in the existance of a land value tax.
My assumption was that density would be allowed to increase as part of a land value tax regime, since that is what it is meant to encourage. More supply of housing.
The OP mentioned concerns about changing to a land value tax. I was throwing out there the fact that there are also problems under the current zoning regime, like those I mentioned in San Fransisco, a drastic example.
I fail do get that point and in your example, you don't explain how property value increases would have not happened in the existance of a land value tax.